Showing posts with label study abroad. Show all posts
Showing posts with label study abroad. Show all posts

28 March 2007

When It Rains, It Snows!

Too many exciting things are happening at once. I feel my life is viable to explode.

Today I got my first assignment from John Welch for contributing to the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley (CWHN) project. They want to have all his papers processed in time for what would be his 100th birthday, March 27, 2010, so they need all the volunteers they can get. I'm working on retyping a transcription of a speech Nibley gave in the 1970's on translation (the language related kind, not the gospel type). It's very exciting, though I'm not sure how in the world I'll have time for this. Ah well. It makes me excited anyway.

I'm presenting my early Mormon rhetoric paper at the AML meeting at UVSC April 7th. I did all right when I read it at the Humanities Symposium at BYU, but hopefully this time I can slow down so people can actually understand what I'm saying. And maybe they'll have a podium tall enough that I can actually look at the audience without losing my place completely. Any tall people with me on that? (PS - You're all invited to come hear me! The conference is free.)

In exactly a month from today, I will be in Scotland hiking Ben Lomond!! And I've been wasting much valuable homework time mapping out the study abroad stops on Google Earth. Don't worry, I'll make the .kmz file available to y'all when I finish it, so you can all be properly jealous and stalk my journeyings efficiently. I've also been scoping out the various travel blogging sites to decide which one I want to use for my forays in England. Any suggestions from fellow travel bloggers?

I've been dating George for 48 days now. Not that I'm counting. Not that they've been some of the best days of my life.

And he's coming to my brother's baptism and the extended family after-priesthood-session dinner on Saturday.

What am I doing taking off to England for two months without him?

Speaking of, general conference is coming up, and I hear they're going to rededicate the tabernacle, which should be exciting. I'm trying to decide whether or not to do a blog-cast of conference like I did last year. Maybe I'll just settle for eating junk food and doing some general conference Snuggling. Mmm. (And now I can't remember if the Church style guide says I should capitalize general conference or not. Good thing I'm in the Writing Center and can look it up. Guess what? You don't, unless you use the full official title with the number. Does anyone else feel like they never seem to get out of the 170's? My brother and I have a long standing joke that every year it's the 176th or 179th and they never really change.)

The cover art for the final Harry Potter book is also out. Gah! I'm so excited! I just finished charting all the Harry Potter film locations I want to visit while I'm in London. :D

And to top it all off, there's snow on the ground this morning. My life is complete.

05 March 2007

Family Stories

Did I mention how much I love my study abroad class? For the midterm, we got to make up our own questions related to the ideas we're discussing about the stories, and then just free-write about them for a class period. Awesomeness. The question I choose was "How are our roles in my family shaped by the stories we tell about each other? Do the stories we tell change the roles we play?" The question comes from David Copperfield--how his uncle Murdstone labels him unfairly as a problem child after only one incident. I think we tend to do this a lot in our lives, and I wanted to explore how my family does it. Anyway, I think the results are pretty interesting, and some of you might appreciate them. It was a good midterm though. It challenged me to write stories, rather than philosophy, which is something I need to practice. And I haven't done any editing yet for tone shifts and misspellings, so cut me some slack.

The least favorite story I’ve ever had told about me by my family is that I’m controlling. I’m an oldest child, it’s what I’m supposed to do, right? I spent a lot of my childhood babysitting younger siblings, or helping them out in school. In return for all this help, I’ve always felt like I deserved some sort of authority, like I should have a say. Authority’s probably not really the word I’m looking for, I guess. It’s more like advisory. I want to have my opinion count for something, to be able to give advice like a parent would. It’s the least I can ask: in exchange for the responsibility, shouldn’t I get a few of the rights?

But about when I was 15, my parents decided I was too controlling. Our family was never one to talk about these sorts of issues behind closed doors, in a calm and rational way. I think it started at the dinner table one night, when I was advising my sister on how to deal with her crazy friends who were always in some sort of drama. It seemed to come out of nowhere: “Liz, you’re not the mom. Stop it,” my sister said. I tried to defend everything I said as completely objective, and looked to my parents for backup on this. But I found the tables had been turned on me: “No, Liz, she’s right; you aren’t the parent, so you need to stay out of everyone else’s business.”

For the next few years, the phrase “you’re not the mom” haunted most of my hours at home. Like Murdstone’s labeling of Davy—“Be careful. I bite.”—it was soon blown past any original meaning. It was certainly true at one level that I needed to stop controlling people. It’s a problem that I’ll need to battle for a long time yet. But the phrase soon just popped out whenever I talked at home. I couldn’t state an opinion about whether it was going to rain tomorrow without being accused of coveting my former role. At first, I would try to explain how the situation was not at all similar to the original problem, but it took so much effort that I soon gave it up as a lost cause. It got to the point where I simply didn’t want to talk any more at home because no one would respond to what I was saying. All they could see was the problem.

***

Michael is my second youngest brother. Actually, he’s the second oldest too. He’s right in the middle of the three brothers—Spencer, Michael, and Josh. And he acted like a typical middle child, trapped in the middle of nowhere. He and Spencer never got along well. This is partially because for most of his childhood, Spencer was possessed of some sort of demon that convinced him the best way to have fun was to try to push other people’s buttons. Not in a friendly sort of way—the way you might tease someone who you loved. Not in a sadistic kind of way either—it wasn’t the same as the sick kid down the street who enjoyed mutilating animals for fun. It was really just a kind of psychological warfare, or perhaps experiment, for Spencer: to find the smallest thing that annoyed someone, something completely ordinary like putting his feet on top of your magazine or sitting in the chair right behind you when you practiced piano, something he could do completely on accident, and then to do it subtly and repeatedly until his victim’s temper finally exploded with nothing to blame for it.

Michael was his favorite victim because he had more of a temper than the rest of us. He had a hard time expressing himself with words—we later found out he was dyslexic—so he would lash out with his body. And since they were only two years apart, they were always together at family activities. They were expected to play together (as siblings who are close in age usually are; it never seems to work out well though). Spencer understood Michael inside and out, watched him like a hawk. I wouldn’t have been surprised to find a list somewhere of all the tools Spencer could use to upset Michael.

It started out as only once or twice a week, but at its peak, there’d be a major fight once or twice an hour. Spencer would start out by breathing too loudly, or sitting too closely. Michael tried to tolerate it for as long as he could, but eventually he would just explode. Fists would be flying and hair would be pulled. Unfortunately, by then, Michael would be too mentally off-balance to do much damage while Spencer would be cool as a cucumber, keeping himself just out of harm’s way until Mom arrived. Then he’d play the innocent victim: “I wasn’t doing anything, Mom. He just started hitting me.”

My mom knew better, of course. I don’t think mothers ever really believe their children’s excuses, and she’d known about Spencer’s experiments for a long time. But I think she, like the rest of us had long given up trying to change Spencer. He seemed perversely stuck with who he was, and we’d just have to pray he’d grow out of it someday. No, she’d give Spencer a verbal slap on the wrist, and then turn to Michael. “You know, he can’t make you angry unless you let him. You just have to ignore him.” Every time, every day, the same thing.

It just became another tool in Spencer’s toolbox.

***

My mom and dad’s relationship has always been interesting. To this day, I’m not sure how they got together. They just seem so different from each other. Dad studied accounting and political science at school: can you get more practical than that? Meanwhile, my mother meandered through college. First, she studied computer science, practical enough, though I don’t think she did it to make money, but just because she liked the idea. But her real love showed through when she got her second degree in English and eventually earned her Master’s in--Horrors!--English. As impractical as you can get, though I still go to her when I need to talk about a good book or understand some doctrinal issue.

She was supposed to be abstract and flighty, or at least that’s the story my dad always used to tell about her. “Mom can’t multitask,” he would always say. He meant it kindly, and you could see that it was true. When she was talking to someone on the phone, you couldn’t have gotten her attention to let her know that her shoes were on fire. And speaking of fires, there was one time when she put cookies in the oven and then took all the kids to the library. Being raised by an English major, of course these trips took well over an hour. We returned to a smell like a charcoal bar-b-que that hadn’t been cleaned all winter had been lit inside the house. I still remember looking at those dozen cookies on the cookie sheet: perfectly round black circles, like I’d imagined coal might be.

She was always doing things like that when she was cooking, not adding the yeast into the bread dough or forgetting about the five pounds of raw meat she’d been defrosting in the microwave, so that you’d find the next morning when you went to heat up your oatmeal. Dad, on the other hand, has always been a wonderful cook. He can balance five different dishes and have them all finish at exactly the same time so that everything would be hot and fresh. And his cookies are still something I ask for every time I come home.

My mom always laughs it off when my dad points out her impracticality. “That’s why I married your dad,” she said, “so you kids would have some chance at not being scatterbrained like me.” But sometimes I see tears in her eyes when Dad would harass her after a particularly bad cooking fiasco, like the turkey that never seemed to be done.

06 January 2007

Insert Clever Title Here

In keeping with my writerly goals, I've been working on a personal essay today. I thought some of you might be interested since I have some avid Jane Austen fanatics in my audience. So here's the first few paragraphs.

I always tell people that I am one of the few women who doesn’t swoon over Jane Austen. Her novels just never seemed to click for me, I’d say, tiny dramas of men and women, carrying on their meaningless lives of dancing and gossip. I hear my female relatives debating the relative merits of Pride and Prejudice versus Sense and Sensibility and expressing their disappointment with Emma, and something inside me just shuts off. When the other girls in our young women’s group would giggle over Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth, I would roll my eyes and pretend to be somewhere else. I make it a point to avoid seeing all the movie adaptations or memorizing all of the couples therein.

And yet when I do pick up one of her novels, I find my disdain is a lie. Not to say, of course, that Jane Austen is one of my favorite authors ever. Her novels lack many elements of my ideal story—long philosophical conversations, huge internal monologues, a driving adventure of discovery, that pivotal moment of epiphanic truth—but when I look at her writings for what they are, I can see that they are good in their own way. They serve their purpose, one crucial to their time period, and they do it with a little flair and humor. I even find myself occasionally empathizing with her characters. Overall, they certainly aren’t the worst things I’ve ever read. As I look out on the prospect of rereading Pride and Prejudice for a class this semester, I even find myself feeling a little nostalgia for the story, though I’ve only read it once.

Do you want to know the truth? Jane Austen terrifies me.

I am afraid of Jane Austen, probably most specifically of Pride and Prejudice, but also of her and of all she represents. Jane Austen is the classic novelist of femininity. Two women who have never met before can instantly strike up a kinship as they reminisce over their first exposure to the original goddess of chic lit and debate over whether Colin Firth or Matthew Macfadyen makes the better Darcy. It is an oblique sisterhood shared in those Victorian pages, where one only has to mention that a potential suitor is such a Mr. Collins to be instantly understood and sympathized with. It is giggles, sleepovers, girl talk, drama, makeovers. It is a world I strove to shut myself out of, or rather shut out of myself. Admitting I feel any connection to what Austen writes sends my sense of identity trembling into a corner.
What do you think? Interested? It gets more rough and more personal after that, but I think I like it thus far.

Anyway, I'm really excited for this semester. Both of my English classes, as well as the Hugh Nibley class, appear to be fairly student-led, which is great. I'm excited to get to explore my own ideas. Prof. Bennion, the one in charge of my Study Abroad, has been sending us all sorts of stuff about the importance of story and its connection to life to prepare for our English Novel class this semester, and it's exactly the sort of thing I want to write about. I'm totally stoked! Yay!

11 December 2006

Thought Stew

So I have a whole bunch of things to blog about, but school is currently consuming my life. And I do mean consuming in its fully literal sense. Once we hit reading day, things should slow down considerably. (I never work during finals' week (should that be possessive?), so I have a ton of free time.) Until then, I doubt I'll have time to pull together anything decent for you to read. But since I feel guilty leaving you out in the cold, consider this post a preview of things to come. Here's what's been occupying my mind:

  • I GOT INTO MY STUDY ABROAD!! I was so nervous, but it's really happening! I'm going to England in the spring to walk all over and write stuff. Joni is coming too, and it's going to be miraculous! I can't think of a better way to spend two months! Although, this does mean I have to get in shape for the hiking bit . . . drat.
  • I finished reading Style: Toward Clarity and Grace, and holy crap! it is amazing. I want to write about it in more detail later, but here's a two page summary of the book that I whipped out as part of my ELang final project. Hurrah for classes that motivate you to do what you already want to do. Sorry about the yucky formatting. No time for making it look better. Read it, or better yet, read the book. It will improve your consciousness of good writing. I can already feel a difference in how I think about things.
  • On Friday, I had an epiphanic moment in History of Rhetoric class: I found my philosopher! I've always found at least some truth in each philosopher I've read, but I also invariably find problems which make their philosophies unacceptable. On December 8, I discovered Kenneth Burke. His theory of dramatism explains exactly why I feel so uncomfortable with experimental fiction that tries to eliminate storytelling *coughVirginiaWoolfcough*. And he has a pyramid theory of rhetoric that almost exactly echoes my circle theory that I've been ranting about for so long! I almost gasped when the teacher introduced it to us. It was like someone read my thoughts and deemed them worthy. It made me want to sing for joy! (I know; I'm a nerd.) I'm now planning to read at least some of his works over the break. I'll write when I find out more.
  • Speaking of History of Rhetoric, I'm writing my final paper on early Mormon rhetoric. It's making me think a lot about the previous debate on what makes a good talk.
  • I'm planning out some Christmas personal essays. Hope you guys are up to some of my crummy attempts at dialog.
  • I saw Happy Feet over Thanksgiving break, which has strangely inspired an essay on dealing with the institutional Church in Mormon literature. I promise I'll explain later, though reading Orson Scott Card's review of the movie might help you see where I'm going. (The review is towards the end, but this column also has some stuff about Scotch tape and Bill Bryson, one of my favorite nonfiction authors, so you should just read the whole thing.)
  • Also, some thoughts on lit crit provoked by CS Lewis' essay "Fern Seed and Elephants" are in the works. For anyone keeping score in my creativity/criticism debate, creativity is beating the snot out of criticism, but we'll find some virtue in her yet.
  • And I promise I have a follow-up for Ben's rebuttal to my Santa post. I will defend Saint Nick to the end. "I believe in Santa Claus like I believe in love . . . ." (Maybe that's not so apt after the last two posts.)
And people wonder why I'm so distracted.