Harry and the Potters Made My Day!

I received in the mail today my CD from Harry and the Potters, a band that sings songs based on--you guessed it--the Harry Potter novels. Not only is the CD going to be epic, but the envelope was handwritten, with a giant Harry Potter smiley face on the back that said "Thanks!" and a sticker inside that said "Hello my name is" and they had written "Elizabeth the Excellent!"

Literary bands are the absolute best and it totally made my day that my CD was so personalized! To thank Harry and the Potters for making my day, here is the link to their website:

http://harryandthepotters.com/

You should totally go check out their stuff, listen to some of their songs, and admire their general splendor. I want to start my own literary band someday. It will happen.

Happy Listening,

Elizabeth the Excellent

P.S.: My favorite song is "Save Ginny Weasley from Dean Thomas"

Engagements

This isn't going to be much of a long post, but it is exciting. My best friend just got engaged after dating her boyfriend for 6 years! I'm really excited for her and wanted to give her this shout out, and also to say that engagements in general are such happy occasions! I can't wait for my own engagement and the story that will come with it. Melissa, enjoy every minute as you prepare for the day I know you've been anticipating for so long!

Signs You are in an Immature Relationship

Okay, so it is really just one sign, not plural.

Today on the radio I heard this from a caller: "So my boyfriend and I have been dating for like, 5 years and we lived on opposite sides of town and had different work schedules, and we [were having troubles] so we decided to move in together, but now we are fighting even worse about really stupid stuff ... like whether to use a bowl or plate for salad, stuff like that and so I thought we should go to couples counseling ...."

First of all (and the first thing the radio people said), couples counseling is for people who are already married and have actual foundational problems with their relationship. Second, it makes me really upset to hear people talk about things like this. This woman has to be at least 20 to have dated someone for 5 years and be considering marriage, which she said she was. If she is that old and can't stand living across town from her boyfriend, something is wrong. I have been dating Matt for 3 1/2 years and for almost half of that time we have lived over 1000 miles apart. We get to see each other once a month. These two were lucky enough to be able to see each other once a week or more to begin with. 

Also, thinking that moving in with someone is going to solve all your problems is pretty illogical. If you can't work out problems by conversation, being around that person more is probably not going to help things. Being apart from Matt has made me appreciate the times we spend talking and seeing each other even more, and the trivial things we sometimes used to fight almost never come up now. It really upsets me when I know several other couples besides us who are also in distance relationships and are determined enough to make it work, and then I hear of people who complain about living across town from one another. Or worse, they are living together and get to see each other every day but waste those precious moments fighting. I would give so much to be able to be with Matt every day.

On a Serious Note

I come to you, readers, few as you may be, in search of not so much an outlet as a loudspeaker for my anger. This morning after my first class of the day, Psychology of the Adolescent, I was fuming. Throughout the day my anger fell to more manageable levels, as can be expected when one has three more classes to get through, in two of which I had midterms. But though I had to put aside my rage to concentrate on these other matters, I tried to hold on to some of that feeling so that I could call it back up later. This is because I think that what I am angry about is completely justified and in fact worthy of being angry about. So, in writing this, I am hoping that what often happens when I write my emotions down does not this time. Usually when I am really angry and I write about that anger, some of those feelings go away, which is often a good thing. This time, I am hoping not to forget how offended and frustrated I am right now, but also be able to put it into coherent words that I can possibly use later, or at least have for reference.

Now that you are wondering what invoked the rage of this 5 foot 2, 100 pound redhead, I guess I should get to the story. I'd already begun to be unhappy with my Psych of the Adolescent professor because he uses the word "paradox" incorrectly, our last test had several questions over things in the textbook that were never mentioned in class, and because the test also had about 5 questions worded only slightly differently over the exact same term. Also, we'd watched two videos in that class, one of which classmates and myself agreed was irrelevant and awkward. The first video we watched actually had something to do with adolescents across the world, and was relevant to the chapter we were studying. The second video, however, was one of two BBC videos on puberty in boys and girls. We watched the girl one, thank goodness.

We watched the second video during a chapter over the social changes that adolescents go through. However, the video focused more on the biological changes of girls. The worst part was that at one point, there was actual video footage of a woman's chest, developing from pre-puberty through adulthood. Needless to say, even though I am in college, I was a little embarrassed that our class was all watching the development of a woman's breasts. But, this video looked at puberty fairly scientifically, and had other parts about what goes on with a girl's hormones during puberty, so I was not completely angry with that being shown. I did feel that it was uncalled for though, as it was sprung on everyone without warning and even though I am a girl, I was certainly not okay with seeing that. I can't imagine what it would have been like if we had been watching the boy version of the video ... although, I'd like to think that it would not go so far because between the two, breasts are admittedly a little less "graphic" than the male genitalia. Still, two classmates and I (one of them being a male himself) all agreed that we thought the video was irrelevant to the chapter we were currently studying and was pretty awkward to watch in class. And we didn't even discuss either of the videos after watching them, and nothing from them was on the quiz.

If it had ended there, I would not have been so angry as I am now. But today, we took notes for 20 minutes and then watched another video. Again, this video was about only girls. So, although I admit I would not want to watch an equivalent video about the biology of males during puberty, I began to think that maybe the person who chose these videos was being a little biased. It was suspicious, at the very least. This video, again, had nothing to do with the chapter we are currently studying, which has to do with family relationships and adolescents. The video was mainly about a) pressure girls feel to have sex, b) girls needing someone to talk to about their changes, and c) a double standard that everyone already knows all about. This double standard, of course, is that fact that guys are seen as "manly" or at least "normal" if they sleep around, whereas girls are seen negatively. There were interviews with teenage girls about this and the word "slut" was used, I'm sure, 50 times or more. The part that made me furious, though, was that the first 10 minutes of the video were thus: 2 minutes of some female psychologist talking about girls and adolescence followed by about a minute of video footage between each bit of dialogue. The  footage was almost exclusively lengthy clips zoomed in on a woman's breasts (with a shirt or bra on) or that of two people making out. I don't know how these clips had anything whatsoever to do with anything the speakers were saying. What's more, I felt like I wanted to stand up for the years of women's rights advocacy that I thought had done something to stop the objectification of women, which is all I think these clips managed to do. There was absolutely no relevance to the subject matter in the video, and it had absolutely no relevance to our current chapter in that class. Again, I felt awkward and almost sick to be watching something so irrelevant and so offensive in class. I decided that "offended" is, in fact, the right word to describe how I feel about being shown a film that had no relevance and half of which was footage of a woman's chest.

So during this entire video I decided that I was going to say something after class about all the things I have already written, which at that point were neatly organized in my head, ready to be barked out with authority to chastise my teacher. Sadly, things rarely work out the way you plan them in your head. After class he stood up from his chair to go turn on the lights, and I had this sudden fear of him leaving without me getting to say how I felt. So I rushed up front by the time he'd gotten back to collect his things from the desk. I said, without any pretense, in the strongest voice I could command at the time, "Hey, are we going to be watching any more of these videos?" He replied that there were about 3 more. It was at this point that I realized that when I get very upset (which I was), I feel like I am going to cry. I could feel my eyes wanting to water and my voice had gone into that tone that was dangerously near cracking. I want to remind you, readers, that I was by no means sad. I was furious. I was enraged. But I'm sure I looked like I was going to start bawling. Worse, there were several other students still in the room who got to see my outburst and looked at me through most of it like I was crazy. But, never mind my embarrassment. On with the story.

I told him (in words I cannot exactly remember now) that I felt these videos didn't have anything to do with what we were currently learning and that I didn't want to watch stuff like that. None of the great points I made earlier about sexism, or offensiveness, or even much more about irrelevancy came out of my mouth. His answer was that there were only a limited amount of videos that had to do with all the chapters in the book, so that's what we were watching, and that next time we watched one I could always leave if I wanted to. Looking back, I wish I had said, "These only cover the first chapter about biological changes, so that is not a good reason!" But I didn't. I did say, in the most rude tone I could muster (rudeness being my last hope at making a point), "Well, then that's probably what I'll do," and I turned and left, trying not to burst into angry tears all the way down the hall. At the end I met the two classmates I know of who agree that these videos are worthless, to which I told I was mad enough to want to punch something. The guy asked if I had scared our professor. I replied that I wished I had. Then we discussed our displeasure over the videos and reasons for that. The guy said, somewhat jokingly, that he felt like he was being forced to become a "lecherous old man," watching all these videos with girl's chests superimposed on the screen. I put this in here to show you that it is not just me and also not just women who were offended by these videos. There are some decent guys out there who don't want to watch stuff like that.

Anyway, I walked away upset and embarrassed, but by now I am mainly just mad. And I'm going to try to keep some of that anger tucked away for the next time we watch one of the videos. I plan to stay maybe 5 minutes, to make sure nothing relevant or interesting is being shown, and when I inevitably see that it is just the same as the others, I am going to unleash that anger by loudly, slowly, and disruptively getting my things together and walking out. Maybe some of my classmates will follow me in defiance. I would love it if the whole class left and our professor was left sitting there looking like an idiot. That probably won't happen. I may be the only one. Or, the next videos we watch might actually be relevant ... though if they follow the trend that is unlikely. Either way, I feel justified in this frustration, so by writing this less-soft strain I am not trying to write away my anger, but rather to put it into coherent logic that I can possibly use if we get to do a course evaluation for this class, to which I will definitely attach this.

Until then, readers.

P.S.: To my two friends in that class who helped me vent out the worst of my anger, thank you for listening and agreeing.

What If?

I heard the song "If God Was One of Us" last week on the radio and then they sang it on Glee on Tuesday. Not sure how I felt about the overall episode, but I really like one part in the song (a part they kind of skipped on Glee, sadly). I think it raises a profound question.

"If God had a face what would it look like
And would you want to see
If seeing meant that you would have to believe
In things like heaven and in Jesus and the saints and all the prophets"

I had never really heard this verse, so when I did on the radio, I was immediately taken aback by it. Of those who do not believe in God, or Jesus, how many say it is because one cannot prove (or disprove) God's existence? Yet, if we were given a specific date and time when we could be shown the face of God if we so chose to look - how many would choose to brush it off and not look merely because seeing would mean that they would "have to believe," and it is much easier to say that you haven't seen Him so you don't believe? How many would know that if they saw God their heart would know He was real and therefore unable to be ignored ... and so would choose instead to look away and stay unknowing? An interesting thought, I think.

To Whom Do We Belong?

I am currently discussing Doris Lessing's "The Summer Before the Dark" in my Brit Lit Class, and reading "Brave New World" to prepare for the discussions next week in the same class. Today I noticed an interesting common point, albeit a small one, between the two. Towards the end of "Summer," Kate Brown, the protagonist, states that "It was as if the rest of her--body, feet, even face, which was aging but amenable--belonged to everyone else. But her hair--no! ...." Kate is using her hair as a metaphor for the transformation she undergoes throughout the book. The ones she feels as though she has "belonged" to previously include her four children (who are now grown) and her husband Michael (who has for many years now been having affairs with younger women). When my eye caught this line today in class, I was reminded of a minimally more sinister sentiment from "Brave New World:" the brainwashed slogan that "everyone belongs to everyone else." In "Brave New World," Bernard Marx seems to be the only character who sees anything wrong with this idea.

Seeing this similarity, it occurred to me that perhaps the reason there seem to be so many problems in relationships today is that many people think they can belong to everyone else--or to merely themselves. It would be hard to deny that as a mother, Kate "belongs" to her children in some form or other as long as they have need for her. Kate's problem is that her children are all grown (except one, but he's almost there), and yet she still acts as if she "belongs to them" as a mother. That is not to say that she is no longer their mother, just that she continues to live her life as if they need her to take care of them when they don't, and it ends up driving her a little mad. Her relationship with her husband, however, is different. Michael is described, in regard to his affairs that he has "delicately" let Kate know about, as a child who has a weakness for sweets but refuses to exert the self-control to give them up. Of course, both of them being into what my professor calls "pop-psychology," this is supposed to be a two-way arrangement that is perfectly acceptable as long as they don't fall in love with someone else. Also, they are not supposed to be jealous of one another. But the fact is, Kate is jealous. And who can blame her? Once Michael starts giving himself to these other women, he doesn't really belong to her anymore. One could almost say he only belongs to himself, since he controls when and to whom he "gives" himself. In a marriage relationship (or any, for that matter), it is unhealthy to say that both partners are free to do as they choose and not only belong to one another. It is just not going to work.

We see this when, sadly, Kate tries a few affairs of her own. They are short-lived, as she is encumbered by her role as a mother and just doesn't have the time to carry on in the way Michael does. She just can't have that cold, uncaring attitude about affairs like Michael does (which effectively has made her lose all respect for him). This business of not belonging solely to one another just will not work.

As I thought about this on my drive home, I thought about the way marriage was set up in much earlier time periods, when a man "owned" his wife like property. I don't think this "belonging" is really the same as that. I don't think one can be owned by someone else just because they are married to them (or in any sort of relationship). It is more of something one gives to the other person, sort of like saying, "If we are going to make this work, I know that I am going to have to belong to you, and only you, and that is what I choose to do." Also, I think about the word "belong" as opposed to the word "own." Belong has the connotation not only of being possessed by, but of fitting in. One definition I found says "to be a part of something else." As in, when you allow yourself to belong to someone else, you become a true part of your mutual relationship. As one-half of a romantic relationship, one cannot belong to two people at once. I think this is why Kate's marriage doesn't work out, and why the World State of "Brave New World" has that feeling of wrongness about it. I think if more people realized that and treated their significant others accordingly, with respect and as if they really belonged to one another, then there would be a lot fewer relationship problems.

Since I mentioned the Literary Can[n]on in a previous post, I thought I should also let everyone know about the Grammar Hammer. It is something a friend--Jeremy--and I sort of made up together. I don't remember the circumstances in which we thought of it. Basically, it is a small sledgehammer with a stamp on the end emblazoned with "Grammar Hammer." It is used on students' papers when they use grammar so atrocious that it would be impossible to grade as is. Obviously, it would only be used in dire circumstances. When I become a teacher, I plan to make/get a Grammar Hammer and a model canon so I can have all the weapons an English teacher needs to survive the war that is High School (just kidding). Of course, I would probably jokingly threaten students with the canon and hammer so that they became something sort of silly, but I would not hesitate to use either if the need called for it. Hopefully though, it would be less of an embarrassing experience and more of "Yeah, I don't know what I was thinking. I'll go fix that," on the student's part.