Archive for the ‘Language’ Category

Literary Lies: The Five Things You Really Mean When You Say “It’s On My List”

October 24, 2012

As a person whose apartment would probably draw casting agents if anyone ever develops a TV show about book hoarding, I never thought I’d feel this way.

I’ve probably said it hundreds of times in my adult life, and heard it just as many times from friends (especially since I added a whole new layer of awkwardness to my social life by publishing a book that only a few people have actually read).

Sure, you could look at the phrase “it’s on my reading list!” as a harmless way to deal with the author in your high school class. It works great on anyone who loved the latest treatise on epidemiology, genetics, or the future of cloud computing, and you can also keep it on hand for folks obsessed with the newest dystopian young adult novel, guide to spirituality, or food-based memoir.

But face it. The one thing “it’s on my reading list” almost never means is “I intend to read that book.” Never before did one little phrase incorporate such an interesting array of self-serving lies.

Here are five things I believe we really mean when we say “it’s on my reading list.”

1)      “I have zero interest in that book, but to avoid offending you, I’m going to pretend otherwise.”

It’s just a book, for God’s sake.  And if someone’s going to give you the cold shoulder for not promising to read some book he or she recommended, remind me why you’re friends?

2)      “That book does not appeal to me, but I’d rather not admit my real interests.” 

Implying that you’re just about to download that particular title onto your Kindle can be an attempt to make other people think you care about things that you really don’t give a hoot about – but who made them the boss of your professed interests?

3)      “I’ve never even heard of that book, but I don’t want you to think I’m a huge ignoramus who doesn’t read the New York Times Book Review or listen to Terry Gross.”

Sure, what someone’s wearing or eating can give us clues to who they are, but glimpsing what someone else is reading is probably the closest we can get to peeking right inside a stranger’s mind without saying a word, and we’d all probably rather be heard raving about Steven Pinker than Stephenie Meyer. Making all sorts of wild claims about what’s on our reading list is one way to build ourselves up in the eyes of others, because when it comes to symbols of intellect – or lack thereof – it’s hard to beat a book (or a mention of your “reading list”).

4) “Funny you should mention that famous, famous book – I’m so embarrassed that I haven’t read it.”

This is one that I’m guilty of.  I have read hundreds of books. But I’ve never read The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (read The Hobbit and that was enough), any Dickens except for A Christmas Carol and part of David Copperfield (I couldn’t take all the weeping), Little Women, Don Quixote, The Grapes of Wrath, Silent Spring or The Kite Runner and I have only the merest smattering of Dostoyevsky and absolutely no Jonathan Franzen, Michiko Kakutani, or David Foster Wallace.  I may read some of them one day. I may not. But I’m going to quit claiming they’re “on my list” any time somebody brings them up.

5) “Of course I have top-flight literary tastes, but I’m too busy and important to have any time for reading.”

Sometimes, pleading the “reading list” isn’t just an attempt to placate someone else, hide your true self or alert the world to your intellect. It’s also a heavy clue about your high-powered lifestyle to anyone who asks (or doesn’t). Here, I must give credit to Tim Kreider’s excellent New York Times essay, “The Busy Trap,” which skewers our self-imposed human hamster wheels and explains why we actually love complaining that we’re busy. Somehow, grousing about our packed schedules has become more fun than reading.

But the book-suggesting masses aren’t going anywhere (and I say this as a person who probably devotes an hour a week to convincing friends, family and co-workers that they’ve got to read whatever book I just finished). How do we cope? I have a few suggestions.

  • You can always give someone else the impression of a sparkling conversation without saying anything at all about yourself or your intentions. It’s called asking questions.  If the other person enjoyed the book, just ask him about it. There is no need to guide the conversation with announcements about reading the book yourself.
  • Stand up for what you really like. If you’d rather not read books about forestry, politics or sexuality, but you love wizards, parenting tips or naval history, say so (politely). It’s not a crime to have your own interests.
  • Be nice without actually implying anything about what you’re going to do. Just trade “it’s on my reading list” for “thanks for the recommendation.” It’s friendly and it’s not a lie.
  • Forget the reading list altogether. Reading doesn’t need to be regimented and curated by you or anyone else. Just read a book. When it’s done, find another one that looks groovy. Repeat.
  • If someone recommends a book you don’t think you’d like, why not expand your horizons? Don’t tell the person that the book is “on your list.” Borrow it and read it. (I tried this at the office recently and am now reading a book with a picture of a horse running through the ocean surf on the cover. The Untethered Soul is actually pretty interesting.)

Enjoying a book is a bit like letting someone else inhabit your mind for awhile – or vice versa. Our taste in books is an intimate part of who we are and what we love. Since our library reveals so much about ourselves, maybe that’s why we tread so carefully when talking about books – and why a statement as innocuous as “it’s on my reading list” can be so many things, from a way to keep the peace to a subtle dispatch on your own importance.

I admit that at heart, the “it’s on my list” syndrome is probably just a harmlessly polite affirmation to dole out to others without inconveniencing yourself.

But I’ve decided to quit saying it, unless the title is truly on my shelf or on my wish-list. And I absolve everyone else of the need to say it to me, even if I wrote the book in question (read it if you want to, or don’t, but don’t feel obligated to bring it up). I won’t hold it against you if you and I have different tastes in books, and I won’t conceal my true interests or feign fascination with yours, so let’s get down to a real conversation about books or anything else that brings some honesty to our social and intellectual world.

Sticks and Stones May Break My Bones, and Don’t You Ever “Her” Me: Dealing With Transgender People and Other Non-Conformists Is Harder Than You Thought.

September 29, 2012

An image from “Untitled Feminist Show,” courtesy of the Philadelphia Live Arts Festival website.

For a long time, my favorite borderline-inappropriate message from a public relations rep (and believe me, there are plenty to choose from; I don’t know how some people get into this field) was an e-mail I got asking for my weight in pounds the night before a magazine assignment in New York City.

To be fair, the communications staffer was asking because the story involved helicopter flights, and the pilots had decided at the last moment to make sure that all the journalists would fit.

But this year’s Philadelphia Live Arts Festival, an annual juried theater festival I have been covering for the past few years, afforded me a new favorite e-mail from a public relations staffer. This was because I had requested press tickets to a performance called “Untitled Feminist Show,” which featured a cast of six completely naked people dancing in one of the city’s premier theaters for one hour. But I was still unprepared for how tickled I’d be by an e-mail from the Festival press rep titled “Important Info for ‘Untitled Feminist Show’.”

“Please be aware of the following information as you write your features and reviews,” my press colleague wrote, introducing a message from Young Jean Lee, Artistic Director of Young Jean Lee’s Theater Company.

“Dear Critic:” it began. I am still trying to figure out whether I like being called, simply, “Critic”, even if I am a theater critic, among other things. Must I be so pigeonholed? As it turned out, I’m not the only one who dislikes a misapplied label.

“One of the cast members of Untitled Feminist Show, Becca Blackwell, identifies as ‘gender-non-conforming’ as opposed to female or male,” Lee wrote. She went on to “respectfully” warn me against referring to the show’s cast as “all-female” or, collectively, as “women,” and remember not to refer to Becca as “she” or “her.”

Performer Becca Blackwell. Image courtesy of Theateronline.com.

Lee had entire sentences ready for me to use.

Instead of referencing the cast as female, “you could say, ‘All of the performers were assigned the female sex at birth, but not all continue to identify as female.’ Or you could say, ‘The cast consists of five women and one trans person’ or “The cast consists of five women and one gender-non-conforming person.’”

To make sure I got the point, Lee continued,

“Instead of writing, ‘In Becca Blackwell’s solo, she embodies a range of characters,’ you could say, ‘In Becca Blackwell’s solo, Becca embodies a range of characters.’ Or ‘In Becca Blackwell’s solo, they [sic] embody a range of characters.’”

It’s a grammar lesson, non-traditional-gender awareness PSA, and a weird intrusion into the professional writing process, all in one.

If we can declare ourselves free from traditional categories of gender (as long as theater critics will word it properly), in the face of a world that sees a vulva or penis and labels a person “girl” or “boy” as soon as said genitals are detectable on an ultrasound, are there other ways we could publicly contradict what the world assumes about our bodies?

For example, a special irritation nags at me every time I fill out forms for my spouse and me which demand I check a box for race. With blond hair, blue eyes and sunburns every summer, I am easily accommodated by the usual options. But my husband isn’t Caucasian or Asian or Native American or Latino or Pacific Islander or any of the usual or even the unusual choices you find on US forms, and despite his dark skin, he doesn’t identify as African-American, either.

As a woman of Norwegian descent married to a Shangaan man of southern Africa, I wonder how hard it will be for our future kids to define their race – and how others will try to define them.

I guess it’s progress that an “interracial” option is beginning to creep into the language of official American demographics. Not a moment too soon, it seems – this article claims that given the erasing boundaries between modern countries, races and cultures, it’s only a matter of time before we all look like Brazilians, our petty differences in skin tone, facial features and hair texture smoothed into one lightly-brown version of humanity.

And I was charmed by a recent essay on volunteering for voter registration by my friend and colleague Susan Perloff, in which she reports that some Philadelphians are now writing “American” in answer to the question about race. It makes perfect sense – we now know that there’s really no biological basis at all for the concept of separate races (so the term “interracial” doesn’t cut it, unless you’re applying it to everyone on the face of the earth).

I think it would be great if my future kids – and any kid who wants to buck that stupid box on demographic forms – could say, “I’m a racial non-conformist.”

But if my future kids’ teachers tacitly or officially classify them as “black,” does that change the fact that they have a peachy-skinned mother? If their census forms call my kids “interracial,” does that change the fact that they’re actually no more of a genetic mash-up than you, me or anyone else alive? If I referred to Blackwell as a woman, would it change anything about who this performer actually is?

What does my language have to do with the full-bodied existence of Blackwell’s identity? Plenty, apparently. Whoever said “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me” should probably put that one to bed. Words matter.

“I felt incredibly opinionated about the fact that I didn’t identify as ‘female,’” the bold and talented Blackwell says in a Village Voice interview about exploring gender identity through dance in the show. “To say that with no words felt impossible.”

Perhaps the “Untitled Feminist Show” communiqué could simply be seen as a request for accuracy and sensitivity. But I think it’s also a snapshot of the question of how much others’ language shapes who or what we actually are.

When I first got that message from Young Jean Lee, I felt a squirm of injustice at her trying to tamper in advance with what I would write, and then had a long, refreshing giggle at the message’s uppity earnestness. If the message had simply informed me that Blackwell is gender-non-conforming, I might have considered it a little superfluous, but I wouldn’t have laughed or raised an eyebrow (I don’t care if your cast is male, female, or neither. I am attending the show to see the merits of your work). It’s the “we respectfully request that when writing about the show, you don’t…” part that got to me, along with the descriptive sentence suggestions.

Because my new favorite press release implies that true non-conformity has three steps:

1)      Stop conforming.
2)      Inform others that you are not conforming.
3)      Require that others accept your non-conformity, and dictate the terms on which they speak of you.

I can see encouraging my future “interracial” family to try steps one and two. But that last one seems pretty tricky. To Lee, Blackwell, and everyone else marching to the beat of their own drum: good luck with step three.

What It Is Like To Be A Freelance Writer

June 3, 2012

This photo of me was on the bio page of one of the websites that I write for. At an event one night a reader of that website told me I was a dead ringer for my photo. Of all the people I could look like, ends up I look like myself.

For Those Who Want to Follow the Rules When They Discuss Not Following the Rules

May 15, 2012

I want to open this blog post with a brief quiz. You are not being graded – except in my private estimation of you as a human being.

Look carefully at the image below.

Are you ready? Here’s the question.

Are the people in the cartoon flaunting the rules?

A)    Yes

B)     No

If you answered “A” for Yes, you are incorrect. These people are not flaunting the rules.

If they were flaunting the rules, they would be putting out their cigarettes, giving the evil eye to anyone else who failed to do so, and handing out pamphlets about the dangers of lung cancer due to second-hand smoke.

So what am I saying? How do you express yourself when someone is knowingly ignoring the rules? If you have described behavior that flagrantly rejects polite norms as “flaunting propriety”, you are not alone. Lots of big-time authors and writers are right there with you. That’s what has finally driven me to write this blog, in humble service to everyone who wants to avoid flouting the rules of English when they refer to people who flaunt bad behavior.

The last straw was a recent blog post by my esteemed colleague over at Life in the Boomer Lane. In an otherwise excellent analysis of the worldwide fall-out when Hillary Clinton was photographed in Bangladesh with spectacles, a casual hair-style, and very little make-up, my fellow writer humorously declares that in “an act that brazenly flaunted common decency and decorum, [Clinton] allowed the world to see the true state of a sixty-four-year-old woman’s face.”

How could you, Hillary?

Later, the writer goes on to say that “Clinton flaunted public opinion further by telling a CNN correspondent” that she felt relieved by the chance to try a more comfortable look.

This galvanizes me to action because I want to say, as I sit at my keyboard in zero make-up, a purple cotton hair-band and glasses, “Good for you, Hillary!” and “Good for you, Life in the Boomer Lane!” for making me smile and bringing Hillary’s confidence to my attention, instead of the latest round of plastic surgery speculations for female celebrities half Hillary’s age. But being the linguistic twit that I am, I cannot say this without exclaiming that Hillary has FLOUTED common decency and decorum (at least as it applies to women in public) and she FLOUTED public opinion (at least as it applies to women in public) by letting a picture of her unvarnished skin hit the media.

I wouldn’t want someone to read my colleague’s post and get the wrong idea about America, because if Hillary is said to have flaunted the accepted approach to female personal grooming, one might think that the US is a place where all women should feel free to appear in whatever state they deem decent, easy and comfortable. And the US is most certainly is not that place.

But I digress.

Before I wrote this blog post I asked a writer friend if she knew the difference between the words “flaunt” and “flout”. She said she had never heard of the word “flout”. Perhaps this is the problem for most people who say “flaunt” when they really mean “flout”.

I would never try to ameliorate the truth of how insufferable I am in the realm of proper linguistic usage to others who occupy themselves with more productive endeavors. But it just breaks my heart when many writers and editors obviously don’t know the distinction between two words whose meanings could not be more different.

I like to think that the beauty of the English language’s grotesquely bloated vocabulary is its specificity. Surely we don’t have such an overloaded language for nothing. There are so many words to choose from – we don’t need to use the wrong word, hoping that it means what we think it means.

My aunt is pretty groovy woman, and she says that life’s real challenge isn’t eradicating our flaws – it’s much more helpful and realistic to simply become self-aware, and recognize our foibles, such as pointing out others’ semantic errors in public.

So I’m going to breathe, and notice what I am. And then press my needs and judgments upon you.

Flaunt: [flawnt] verb

  1. To parade or display oneself conspicuously, defiantly, or boldly.
  2. To wave conspicuously in the air.

Flout: [flout] verb

  1. To treat with disdain, scorn, or contempt; scoff at; mock.

I concede that in the case of Life in the Boomer Lane’s Hillary post, it’s tricky, because while Hillary has not, in fact, flaunted common decency (as it is usually applied to women in public), she has, indeed, flouted societal expectations by flaunting her natural self at age 64.

Try using them each in a sentence.

“The peacock flaunted his feathers in hopes of finding a mate.”

“Rick Santorum flouted American women’s well-being in hopes of securing Tea Party votes.”

Are you still confused? It’s ok. I’m sure you’ve seen the Harry Potter films, so here’s another example that is sure to resonate.

Professor Dolores Umbridge enjoyed flaunting her rules for Hogwarts:

The Weasley twins flouted Professor Umbridge’s rules:

In conclusion, I urge everyone to check out my friend Renee’s excellent work over at Life in the Boomer Lane, which I read every week. I thank her sincerely for her unwitting participation in my blog today.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 779 other followers