Author: Lauren

Sorry Pop, I’m a Closet Monarchist

/ Lauren / Leave a comment

queen-1_2403579bWhen I was in grade 5, my father helped fill the gaps in my social studies curriculum by explaining to me how the “Governor General” part of our parliamentary system really worked. He explained that the Queen was our head of state (which is why her face is on the money), but that neither she nor the Governor General actually DID anything to govern the country, and that Canada’s membership in the Commonwealth was really just a leftover from days gone by. Though I can’t remember the exact words my father used, the gist was that the monarchy was stupid and Canada didn’t need it.

Being a very politically minded ten year old with strong notions of what was “fair” and what was “stupid”, I wholeheartedly agreed with my dad. I even made up a song in support of Canada severing its ties to the monarchy (to the tune of O Canada–I sang it to my sister but she wasn’t a huge fan so I never sought to record it). For the most part, I still agree that to pretend Canada is ruled by a British monarch when in actual fact we are governed by a Prime Minister (and an increasingly powerful PMO) is a bit stupid.

So why did I just catch myself googling articles about baby Prince George’s christening? Why did I bother finding a YouTube video of the Royal Wedding a couple of years ago so that I could watch the ceremony and cry a little as two complete strangers exchanged vows? Why am I so fascinated by the life of the young Elizabeth II, and her parents before her? Why do I agree that Canada’s parliamentary system doesn’t make much sense nowadays while secretly hoping it will never never change? (With regards to the monarchy, I mean, not the more pressing ills plaguing it).

I don’t think it’s just celeb-worship–while I flip through an InTouch or Life&Style in the staff lunch room every now and then, I don’t seek out celebrity news or celebrity photos (though I seem to absorb more than enough of it anyways). And it takes more than being rich and royal to interest me (I’m not interested in the royal cousins, Sarah Ferguson, or any other Windsor-family offshoots). And Prince William is NOT a handsome man (despite what Maclean’s politely prints about him, he’s just not. He’s tall, he’s neat, and he does not yet appear to have a beer gut, but that’s it). So what the hell is the appeal?

Maybe it’s just nice to see a nice young couple behave nicely in public. Most young famous people in the news these days do NOT act very nicely in public. That last sentence made me sound about seventy years older than I actually am, but it’s true–I mean, Justin Bieber wore OVERALLS to collect his completely undeserved Queen’s Jubilee Medal for goodness sakes. (Someone I work with also received a Queen’s Jubilee Medal. He is a wonderful educator who devoted years of his life to volunteerism and to helping young people enjoy and understand math, and though Stephen Harper did not personally give him his medal, you can bet your ass my colleague dressed for the occasion). But I digress. My point is that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge seem like a nice young couple who comport themselves very decorously through an endless stream of public engagements that I would find mind-numbingly boring. I also have a lot of respect for the Queen, who’s been comporting herself decorously through mind-numbingly boring public engagements (on average more than once daily) for over 60 years.

Is it absolutely stupid that some people, by virtue of their birth alone, are supported in relative wealth by the public purse, are pursued relentlessly by media, and are required to christen boats, tour cracker factories, and publicly announce the birth of their children? Yes. It’s stupid. It’s absolutely stupid. But there’s something comforting about it just the same. It’s not just that everyone likes the idea of a fairytale (and royal weddings in which the heir to the throne marries a commoner are the closest we can get to Cinderella’s ball)–there’s something about watching people carry out a duty they did not ask for, politely and without complaint, that does us good. With the exception of Charles’ and Diana’s carryings-on, the British royal family uphold an image of propriety in an increasingly vulgar world (a world where just the other evening a drunk man peed in my stairwell, such fun!). And it’s not a life I’d want, riches or no riches.

Do you think the pregnant Duchess enjoyed a slew of news cameras all but up her uterus as she was giving birth? Do you think William enjoys having stories about his dead mother smeared across newspaper stands and screamed on the nightly news every time some quack has a new conspiracy theory about her death? Do you think either of the royal couple enjoyed having their engagement and marriage compared to that of Charles and Diana, a marriage that failed so disastrously and so publicly they can never be free of it? Do you think the Queen enjoys touring the aforementioned cracker factories or standing on a barge in the pouring rain as a flotilla goes down the Thames in her honour (if someone was going to do something in MY honour, I’d ask to not be standing around in the rain, please). Do you think the royal family enjoys having to ask the British government for money every time their home (Buckingham Palace, which also doubles as a tourist attraction) gets a leaky roof or a past-due carpet? Of course they don’t. But they do these things, all of them, and they never act as though they mind. They understand the ways in which they are privileged and accept the ways in which they have to pay the price. In other words, they’re the absolute best kind of rich people, and for that, I bear them no ill will.

My respect for the Windsors’ commitment to their duty aside, perhaps I, like many other closet monarchists, just like being able to watch a young couple live out their (relatively) normal life–dating in college, getting engaged on vacation, getting married, having a baby, etc. I wonder if everyone should be assigned a random young couple whose lives they can follow with interest and a sense of good will even though they have no personal connection to them. Isn’t it nice to want happiness for total strangers who can do nothing for you? I think so. Whether you agree with the monarchy as part of a governing structure or not, you can’t deny that if “Will and Kate Windsor” were just a new couple in your neighbourhood you’d probably think they were very nice and wish them the best as they started their family. The fact that they’re “royal” really shouldn’t change that. Like a win for our favourite sports team, a turn of good fortune for the royal couple (like the delivery of a healthy baby) is something that people seem to rally around and be happy about. And why not?

Maybe deep down the real reason I am interested in the monarchy is because somewhere in my mind I have confused the Queen with my grandmother. A much more soft-spoken, well-dressed, and British version of my grandmother. Actually, Queen Elizabeth II and my Latvian grandmother are nothing at all alike, but I don’t care. I once saw a photo of the Queen at her wedding (when she was still Princess Elizabeth)–her gown was relatively simple with long white sleeves and a long filmy veil. Though my grandmother’s wedding dress was not similar in grandeur, her style was similar in sentiment–same post-war simplicity and modesty, same white sleeves, same long filmy veil (same hairdo too I think, though my grandmother did not have a tiara). Same soft black and white photographs, same tall husband standing with military erectness, beside and a little behind his new wife. All of this is absolutely fascinating to me.

I also once heard an anecdote in which one of the Queen’s hunting dogs brought her a nearly dead pheasant (this happened in 2000, I believe). Her Majesty took the bird from the dog’s mouth and wrung its neck until it was dead (I assume to end its suffering, as it had already been shot). I like to think that my grandma, who was raised on a farm (until the Soviets took it away), would do the same. Some may shy away from the harsh realities of pastoral life, but not the Queen and my grandma, no siree. If a pheasant’s neck needs wringing, they wring the pheasant’s neck–no harm, no fowl.

[Sorry, I couldn’t resist. I’m trying to cheer my dad up now that his daughter’s a monarchist against both our better judgement. I guess I was smarter at ten than I am at 27.]

UPDATE: My mom says I forgot to mention that I have a British passport–very true, I am a dual citizen. So if one is a subject of Her Majesty by virtue of being British, or by virtue of being Canadian, then perhaps I’m such a monarchist by virtue of being DOUBLY a subject of the Crown. Such fun!

Dear English Paper: Go Write Yourself

/ Lauren / Leave a comment

Dear English Paper,

I’ve been avoiding you, and I’m sorry.

In a way, this is all my fault. I took my first undergraduate English literature course when I was 18 years old and now, nine years later, I still don’t seem to have learned my lesson. I admit that it was arrogance on my part to register in a first-year fiction course with the assumption that I (who have been taking upper level English classes for the past few years) would find it easy. In my defense, I thought it might be interesting to get back to fiction basics, and also, the student bus pass I get when I take courses is SUPER cheap. All excuses aside, we’re here now, and I know it’s childish of me to hide from you.

But does this really have to be so hard? It’s not that I don’t want to write you, I do! In fact, I absolutely love having written an English paper, it’s just that I don’t want to go through the act of writing you, rehashing the same old MLA guidelines over and over, dealing with word counts and pretentious-sounding titles. We’ve been through it all before and every time it exhausts me.

We have some history, you and I. It’s not as though you’ve always been kind to me–I recall several occasions during which I was slumped on the rug between the shelves of the library’s journal collections crying because I couldn’t find the article I was looking for (and when I did find it, it wasn’t useful anyways). There’s been a lot of wasted printer ink. A lot of late nights. I give and I give and I give, English Paper, and it’s never enough for you, is it?

But I don’t want to blame you. You want me to be better. You want me to read more critically, think more deeply, and write more persuasively. I understand this, but it still hurts. In the dead of night when I’m hunched over my laptop and I want nothing more than to close my eyes and sleep or maybe, just maybe, read a damn book for pleasure now and again, it hurts.

I want you to know that the relief I feel every time I hand you off and stop thinking about you is immense. But something keeps drawing me back to you, English Paper, and I just can’t keep myself away–soon we are entwined in the same familiar dance: introductory paragraph, argument, textual support, properly cited references, conclusion… I spice it up with a few clever turns of phrase, something daring, something a bit flashy even, but soon that spark disappears and we go through the motions, plodding along, torturing one another until I’m so sick of you I stop caring whether I’ve done right by you, whether I’ve done the best I could.

Tell me, English Paper, how does the family dynamic affect the characters’ emotional growth in D.H. Lawrence’s Sons and Lovers? And would you say any of them find fulfillment? Why or why not?

But you won’t tell me. You’ll simply blink at me, your blank face transmitting nothing but my own words, words which seem foolish upon reevaluation. You will take my words, and give me nothing.

And yet, here we are. All paths lead to you. It is time for me to conclude this epistle and meet you face to face once more, on the barren white battlefield of our difficult and pedantic love.

Adieu, adieu

NiftyNotCool

DearEnglishPaper

Ridiculously Fun: Fighting Chance Productions’ Rocky Horror Show

/ Lauren / Leave a comment

rocky-posterIf you’re still a “Rocky Virgin”, it might be time to pop your theatrical cherry with Fighting Chance Productions‘ season opener, the cult classic Rocky Horror Show, playing at the Jericho Arts Centre until October 26 (with “11:59 Midnight” showings October 12th, 19th, and 25th).

Fans of the 1975 film The Rocky Horror Picture Show starring Tim Curry will know what to expect, but those who have never experienced the castle of Dr. Frank-N-Furter on either stage or screen are in for a bit of a shock. This show is NUTS, and it doesn’t make a lick of sense, plot-wise. That doesn’t mean it isn’t a great time. Though the film was originally considered a flop, a devoted group of fans soon made The Rocky Horror Picture Show an engaging and interactive experience through the development of “official” heckles and the use of audience props.

Fighting Chance’s Rocky Horror Show embraces (and often relies) on these traditions to make the performance the fun that it is. The cast members expect to be heckled and are not surprised when the audience showers the stage in rice or playing cards (for the safety of the performers, audience members are asked NOT to bring their own props, and to instead purchase actor-friendly prop bags available at the venue for $5 if they want to throw things during the show). Not knowing any of the traditional heckles, I felt a bit left out, but after doing some internet research it seems that part of the mystique is having to attend a showing or performance of Rocky enough times in order to catch on, and since the heckling is sort of ever-evolving, it’s hard to find a definitive source anyways (the Official Fan Site for The Rocky Horror Picture Show does NOT publish a list, though it does help clarify the Rocky phenomenon). In the spirit of good fun, I do have a few tips to get you Rocky Virgins started:

  • Whenever a character says the name “Brad Major”, yell “ASSHOLE!”.
  • Whenever a character says the name “Janet Weiss”, yell “SLUT!”.
  • Whenever Brad asks a castle resident for a telephone, yell “CASTLES DON’T HAVE TELEPHONES!”
  • When Dr. Frank-N-Furter sighs, “Whatever happened to Fay Ray?”, yell “SHE WENT APESHIT!”
Erika Thompson and Will Hopkins play a nice young couple who don't know what they're getting into. Photo credit: Devin Kerringten

Erika Thompson and Will Hopkins play a nice young couple who don’t know what they’re getting into. Photo credit: Devin Kerringten

By and large, the performances (by both the leads and the chorus members) are pretty solid. Good singing, good dancing, lots of camp and naughtiness, but one performance truly stands out: Seth Little simply dominates as Dr. Frank-N-Furter, with a voice to match his physical prowess. Every purse of his painted lips or cock of his pencilled eyebrows is both perfectly natural and right on cue. Little speaks, moves, and sings with the ease of a seasoned drag veteran (one would think he wears a corset and heels every day of his life, and who knows, maybe he does…).  I love when a performer takes a difficult role (especially such an iconic one) and makes it seem effortless; Little is a pleasure to watch. A special nod should also go to Erika Thompson for her performance as the ingenue-turned-“slut” Janet Weiss, and Steffanie Davis for her delicious portrayal of Dr. Scott.

Few opening nights are without their technical hiccups and unfortunately during Tuesday’s performance serious microphone issues left some main characters without a mic for several musical numbers (thankfully never Dr. Frank-N-Furter), and overall, I felt the musicians needed to be turned down just a bit so as not to overpower the singing. The draped walls and cavernous ceilings of the Jericho make it a difficult singing space to begin with, so even with a talented cast doing their valiant best, a lot of lyrics were lost over the course of the night. Having worked with (and attended many productions by) smaller theatre companies, I am usually pretty forgiving of technical snafus (especially on opening), however, given that tickets to the Rocky Horror Show sell for $39.25 each ($34.25 for students/seniors), the audience really should be able to expect a fairly high level of technical mastery. I sincerely hope these technical issues are just a case of “Opening Night Murphy’s Law” and will be worked out for the remainder of the run–it would be a shame if they prevented anyone from enjoying what is an otherwise outrageously pleasurable show.

Luckily for Fighting Chance (and for the audience), if any show can handle a few technical disasters it’s the Rocky Horror Show. It’s raunchy, campy, and incredibly interactive. The characters know they’re putting on a show and they can react to technical mishaps with humour and cheek. The audience is never meant to forget that they’re watching a performance so it’s not a big deal if we can see some of the strings being pulled. Technical issues aside, the Rocky Horror Show is absolutely ridiculous and is ridiculously fun to watch.

The Rocky Horror Show runs until October 26 at the Jericho Arts Centre. Tickets can be purchased online or by telephone at 604.684.2787.

Disclosure: My tickets to the Rocky Horror Show were provided by Fighting Chance Productions. The content of the review is my own.

Yes, it’s raining, get off your lazy butt

/ Lauren / Leave a comment

It’s sweater weather! And it’s going to rain/is raining!

Which means, of course, that all you want to do is snuggle up inside with a book, a cup of tea, maybe a pot of chili, and stay there until May. Which is understandable, but doesn’t take advantage of the great cultural and recreational boon the rainy season provides you: the weather sucks so you don’t need to be outside. Which means you can be inside, experiencing the many indoor cultural and recreational amenities Vancouver has to offer. You can enjoy indoor experiences like:

Physical fitness/recreation – Unless you’re pretty hardcore, you will likely be doing a lot less jogging, cycling, Ultimate Frisbee, etc. now that the sky will be pouring rain almost daily. Which means this is the perfect time to try some indoor  fitness/recreation:VCSOnWhite

  • The Vancouver Circus School – Obviously, I’m a bit biased, because I’ve been training there for years, but I will say that hot weather makes sweating it out upside down near the ceiling on a pair of aerial silks a particularly gross experience. Now that the air’s cooled off, I can warm myself up by working up a sweat and I don’t have to worry that I’ll pass out from heat exhaustion 15 feet above the ground. Fall/winter is the best time of year to try out circus, trust me.
  • Hillcrest Aquatic Centre – I go there because they have a sauna, a hot tub, and an amazing feature called a “lazy river”–it’s a circular pool with a current where you grab a couple pool noodles and just float around in a circle. It’s hella relaxing and I could probably bob along like that for hours. Unlike at Wreck Beach, you have to wear a bathing suit, but I think it’s worth it. (For you fitness buffs, there’s actual lane swimming as well, but who needs that when you can float on the lazy river?)

Theatres – The 2013/2014 season is getting underway in Vancouver and, as usual, there is a lot going on. I recommend visiting the Georgia Straight’s arts listings (you can search for “Theatre” under the “Types” tab) for a fairly comprehensive list of what’s playing right now, but in particular there are two shows opening next week that have been on my radar:

  • The Rocky Horror Show – Fighting Chance Productions, playing at the Jericho Arts Centre October 8 – 26, with previews October 4 and 5. I should probably disclose that I’ve been invited by the company to attend, but regardless I’m pretty excited about it because I’ve never seen a production of the Rocky Horror Show and it has such a cult following. If you want to get into the Halloween mood or just into an outrageous one, I have a feeling this will be fun. LET’S DO THE TIME WARP AGAIN!
  • Corporations in our Heads – Theatre for Living, kicks off October 10 and 11 at Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood House before going on a BC/Alberta tour, returning for a Vancouver run in December. Again, I was invited by the company to attend, but I won’t be able to until its December run (however, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t think about going next week). Though I haven’t yet seen the show I was so impressed and moved by Theatre for Living’s maladjusted this past spring that I can recommend this event without too many qualms. Whether you like it or not, I guarantee that you’ll have an experience (RSVP’s for the kick-off dates recommended–call 604-871-0508 for more info). If you, like me, can’t make the kick-off dates, you may want to keep Corporations in our Heads in mind for December.

Literature – There’s the obvious, you could stay in with a good book of course (it’s something I plan on doing a lot this winter). But you can also experience literature by leaving your house. Pretty wild, huh?VPLimages

  • The Vancouver Public Library – The downtown location is big, it’s beautiful, the selection is huge and there are lots of nooks and crannies where you can curl up and read a book if you so choose. There are also lots of smaller VPL locations scattered around the city so check them out if there’s a book you don’t own that you’ve been hankering to read.
  • Readings and Discussions at the SFU Libraries – Did you know that the readings and discussions hosted by the Simon Fraser University Libraries are open to the public? They are! And you know what? They’re also kind of fun. I recently attended a reading by SFU Writer in Residence Madeleine Thien (this one hosted by the Department of English) and it was fantastic. These are authors, poets, and academics at the top of their game, and they’re willing to share some of what they’ve got FOR FREE.
  • Jordan Abel launches Place of Scraps and Poetry is Dead Magazine launches their sound poetry issue – Vancouver poet Jordan Abel is launching his new book of erasure poetry, Place of Scraps, at the Western Front on October 10 (303 E 8th Ave., doors open 7:30) but FIRST (shameless plug alert), Poetry is Dead Magazine will be launching their new issue of sound poetry and I will be reading at it (same location/evening/time)! If you’ve never heard sound poetry before, you’re in for a crazy treat.

Museums – For such an outdoor-oriented city, there are actually a lot of museums in town. My recent favourite:UBC_MOA_sign

  • The Museum of Anthropology at UBC – We went there last Sunday when it was pouring buckets outside, and it was such a great way to spend a rainy afternoon. The artifacts and exhibits are so gorgeous, and so lovingly and carefully housed. The showstopper is, of course, the Great Hall – a massive atrium full of mid-19th century totem poles and house posts carved by Northwest Coast nations. Artistically and architecturally, the effect is breathtaking. That’s not to say the other exhibits aren’t interesting–the museum is much larger than it first appears, housing collections of art and artifacts from cultures around the world (hint: pull open the drawers beneath the glass cases, they’re meant to be opened and are full of more neat stuff). My party and I sat in front the beautiful The Raven and the First Men in the Bill Reid Rotunda for a long time. I was so taken with this sculpture I’m only now realizing I forgot to walk all the way around it to see the whole thing. Silly me. Guess I’ll have to go back.

The thing is, the ideas above are just ones from off the top of my head–things I’d done or heard about. You probably know of quite a few cool things too. So between the collective minds of an interesting city, there’s really no excuse to spend the entire winter on your couch.

Portland ho!

/ Lauren / Leave a comment
Our view from Departure

Our view from Departure

Autumn is upon us, a chill is in the breeze, and for the past two years this has meant my taking off on an adventure abroad. This year however, the TC and I are saving up for our wedding so another overseas journey is out of the question. That’s just fine–there are a lot of cool places to visit not far from Vancouver. Places like…

Portland, Oregon!

I’ve never been down the west coast of the US before so the only thing I knew about Oregon was that it was pretty and had apples and also the Portland Timbers (an MLS team I can respect despite it not being my beloved Whitecaps FC). Also, I thought Portland would probably be cool, and it is.

How we got there: We took the Bolt Bus. Costs about $100 for a round-trip from Vancouver, and takes about 8 hours each way. The bus also has free wi-fi, which is great when you end up stuck at the US-Canada border for an hour and a half because there are five buses full of Seattle Seahawks fans in front of you.

Pros of the Bolt Bus: relatively cheap and easy way to get to Portland, you get to go through Seattle which is cool, and Washington state is really pretty when it isn’t raining.

Cons of the Bolt Bus: the seats are not all that comfortable and you don’t really stop anywhere long enough to have a meal (so pack a lunch but eat your fruit before you get to the border!). It was also raining and dark on our way back through Washington state, so there were very few pretty views to be had.

Where we stayed: With friends in Milwaukie, a suburb of Portland. It was pretty easy to get to downtown on the bus, which cost $2.50. The streetcar system is pretty cool too.

What we did: Ate a LOT, took in Pecha Kucha PDX (which is free, unlike in Vancouver), played ukulele in the car, went to a house party where the host and his incredibly talented friends played bluegrass all night (there were banjos, mandolins, guitars, a fiddle, even a stand up bass), went shopping for hiking boots (no sales tax, woot!), visited Powell’s Books, watched the sun set over Portland from Departure on the 15th floor of the Nine’s Hotel, walked around the tres cool East Side (including the antique/oddity shop Smut Vintage, where I was tempted to buy someone else’s old photo albums, and where a 1980s issue of the motorcycle titty mag Easyriders had a cover story titled “What’s the KKK up to?” which included an interview with a clan wizard), and generally chilled out, which is easy to do when you’re in Portland.

Super cool houses in the East Side

Super cool houses in the East Side

Where we ate:

  • Clyde Common – a trendy eatery near the Ace Hotel in downtown Portland. The cocktails were excellent but not cheap, and the food was decent upscale pub fare (honey bacon, good bread, that sort of thing) though nothing that blew my hair back. Perhaps if we’d been there for supper rather than lunch we would have been more inclined to order something more exciting than a club sandwich and a burger. That being said, “happy hour” is a thing in Portland, and Clyde Common’s lasts for three hours, so if I ever want to get day-drunk on good mixed drinks I’ll know where to go.
  • Bridgeport Brewery – our official reason for going to Bridgeport was to fill up a friend’s growler, but we stayed for lunch and it was pretty great. Great fries. A pasta special. Excellent (cheap) beer. Mini pies for dessert. We filled up the growler with Witch Hunt, Bridgeport’s seasonal spiced harvest ale (as far as autumnal beers go, this is probably the best I’ve had). Sad story: we actually filled a second growler with delicious-smelling chocolate porter but the growler must have been cracked–the neck of the bottle spontaneously broke off while we were idling at the border and chocolate porter spilled all over the bus. Sigh.
  • Jam on Hawthorne – Who doesn’t like a good breakfast? Who doesn’t like the option to get a waffle with the works and a big pile of hash browns on the side? Unlike most popular East Van brunch venues, Jam on Hawthorne is huge so the only reason we had to wait ten minutes for a table was because I didn’t want to sit near the fans (I was cold). They also have a play area for kids and give you lollipops on your way out.
  • Departure – TC and I wanted to have a cool drinking/dining experience while the sun went down and we really couldn’t have asked for anything cooler than the 15th-floor rooftop patio at Departure. For one thing, the interior is CRAZY and looks like a space ship. For another, despite its fanciness, it’s not as expensive as some of my more splurge-y dining favourites in Vancouver. Thirdly, the view is amazing, fourthly, the drinks are awesome, and last but definitely not least, the food is effing delicious. The best way I can describe the menu is “Asian tapas” (ordering a bunch of dishes and eating with share plates and chopsticks). Everything we tried was good, but our favourites were definitely the wok-fried Brussels sprouts with chili, lime, and mint, and the orgasmically good crispy pork belly.

What I would do again: I would certainly spend more time exploring the East Side because it’s a pretty cool neighbourhood. I would go back to Departure, because the food was really that delicious, and I absolutely need to go back to Powell’s Books. It is the Versailles of used bookstores and I even had to run around putting a few things back before I went to the till because I realized I didn’t have room for everything I’d picked out. If you love books, visiting Powell’s is just a gorgeous experience (thank you to blogger/illustrator Loobylu for the great tip!). Poor TC had to watch me lose my nostalgic shit over all the books in the “Newbery Honor” section of the children’s area, and it definitely took a great feat of willpower for me to not to buy up all the Winne the Pooh. I even found myself lusting after books I hadn’t thought of in years, like Charlotte’s Web and A Wrinkle in Time. Sigh…what’s a book lover to do?

PowellsBooks

Best ever.

My only real regret about our time in Oregon is that we didn’t get to see more of it, especially the Oregonian wilderness outside the city.  Luckily for us, Oregon is not far away. So til next time, keep it real, Portland!

Canadian Democracy Round-Up Fall 2013

/ Lauren / Leave a comment

Parliament_Hill_Front_EntranceIt’s been a long year for this lil’ blog o’ mine, and a long year for democracy in Canada. Considering we’ve now passed the half-way mark between the 2011 federal election and the next one, I wanted to take stock, in a general sense, of what’s been going on around me while I was busy thinking (and writing) about other things.

So, in no particular order, I give you my Canadian Democracy Round-Up for Fall 2013:

IDLE NO MORE AND BC RECONCILIATION WEEK PUT FIRST NATIONS ISSUES FRONT AND CENTRE, AND THE OPPOSITION PARTIES, AT LEAST, ARE PAYING ATTENTION

I’ve learned so much more about the history of First Nations people in Canada and the disastrous legacy of Residential schools in the past year than I’d learned in the whole of the rest of my life (and I even grew up near a reserve, so I really don’t have much of an excuse except that the issues weren’t much taught in my school). And I truly believe that Canada as a whole can only benefit from the success of this movement–culturally, environmentally, and morally–and from real, concrete acts of reconciliation with First Nations people. I also believe the legal challenges several First Nations have filed against the Canadian government’s proposed pipeline projects are maybe the best chance we have of escaping a massive spill in this province.

[One of my favourite pieces written about this movement is called An open letter to all my relations: On Idle No More, Chief Spence and non-violence by Anishinaabe lawyer and excellent writer Aaron James Mills. Please read it if you haven’t already.]

STEPHEN HARPER REALLY REALLY WANTS TO KEEP POWER, BUT I’M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHY.

harper-620-9847209Stephen Harper wants you to think that a stable majority government for the Conservatives is necessary to steer Canada through dark economic times, but I honestly can’t see how Canada would be any worse off under any other government’s management than it is now. If Harper really wanted to improve Canada and make it a better place to live for Canadians (including First Nations people and new immigrants), he’d make policy decisions based on sound scientific and statistical evidence. Instead, he’s prorogued Parliament, again, so that he can focus on trying to coerce BC First Nations into agreeing to various oil pipeline projects that would destroy BC’s pristine landscape (and the tourism industry it supports, not to mention an entire way of life for First Nations people) and bring in very few permanent jobs. Oh, and Harper and his message are stompin’ around the BC countryside right about the same time as BC’s Reconciliation Week. Sound (or tactful) policy this ain’t.

Generally speaking, Harper’s been spending his time making sure he’ll be reelected. Most of his decisions do not benefit Canada, but they do benefit his party, the corporations that support it, and those who share his conservative ideology. The Canadian government’s muzzling of scientists, for example. Why would you want to keep scientists from making their research public? Surely the public, who pay for the research with their tax dollars, have a right to the information required to make sound decisions about the future of their country. The Canadian government, after all, is merely meant to represent the will of the Canadian people, not effectively decide what their will is by withholding information from them. But, of course, much of this research could jeopardize the Harper Government’s claims that they take the environment seriously (as they essentially copy-paste oil lobbyists’ requests into legislation), so it must be controlled. Ho hum. So much for science.

But surely the Parliamentary Budget Officer, whose mandate, according to the PBO’s published literature, “is to provide independent analysis to Parliament on the state of the nation’s finances, the government’s estimates and trends in the Canadian economy; and upon request from a committee or parliamentarian, to estimate the financial cost of any proposal for matters over which Parliament has jurisdiction”, would meet with no resistance to his requests for information? Well, no. Unfortunately, the PBO kept asking questions the government didn’t like, so they made it as difficult as possible to find the answers. Answers which, as it turned out, Canadians desperately needed to keep us from doing stupid things like paying for outlandishly expensive F-35 fighter jets. Thank you PBO!

As for you, Harper Government, what the hell do you want to keep running Canada for? You clearly don’t like our country all that much.

JUSTIN TRUDEAU WINS LIBERAL LEADERSHIP RACE. THE FIRST MAJOR THING HE DECIDES TO DO IS TELL US HE SMOKED POT A FEW TIMES (ONCE EVEN AFTER HE BECAME AN MP).

Gasp. Big deal. Trudeau used to work in Whistler, after all. The only thing newsworthy about this is the hoopla everyone, Trudeau included, is making about it. And that Trudeau was stupid enough keep talking about it when he should be trying to prove to people that he’s not too young or inexperienced (or stoned) to head up our economy.

OPPOSITION PARTIES REALLY SHOULDN’T EXPECT GOVERNMENT SCANDAL TO CARRY THEM TO VICTORY

This one should have been obvious after the federal Conservatives were found to be in contempt of Parliament in 2011 and Canadian voters still handed them a majority. But alas, the BC NDP seemed to have forgotten this entirely during our last provincial election. They chose a leader (Adrian Dix) who definitely had the best intentions but about as much charisma as a soggy umbrella, and expected that the BC Liberal’s various scandals and fumbles (HST, the ethnic vote scandal, their wishy-washiness over oil pipelines) would convince voters that he should be premier. BC Liberal leader (and current premier) Christy Clark is definitely not my favourite person in the province, but you gotta admit the lady knows a thing or two about public presentation. While Dix and his BC NDP seemed content to play the “aw shucks, I’m a nice guy” card and let the Lib’s past offenses speak for themselves, Christy Clark was doing her best to make sure that people who wanted jobs, security, and economic prosperity would choose her. Turns out, a lot of BCers really like jobs. As of yesterday, Adrian Dix has stepped down as BC NDP party leader, which is a decision I certainly respect, but I really wish that he’d decided to leave the job before the provincial election.

Federally, the Opposition parties need to understand that for better or worse, the Harper Government controls the message (did you enjoy those taxpayer funded attack ads this spring?) and they are going to define the terms of the debate. Want to get all huffy and puffy about Senate reform, Mulcair? That’s fine, but just so you know, Stephen Harper is doing everything he can to convince Canadians that their livelihood, financial security, and family’s future depends upon him. So, you know, you might want to spend some time on that (i.e. the economy), instead of whatever it is you’re doing. By all means, remind Canadians how shitty the Prime Minister is (and remind them again during the actual election), but don’t forget they can’t eat your self-righteousness for dinner.

We want solutions guys. Solutions not based in some kind of pie-in-the-sky socialist utopia where there’s enough money to pay for everything and cars run on happy thoughts. We want evidenced-backed solutions that demonstrate how implementing X, Y, or Z will be good for Canadians AND the economy. Obviously, it would help if the long-form census hadn’t been scrapped, but try to work with what you’ve got. Please? Okay.

THERE WILL BE NO FALL SITTING OF THE BC LEGISLATURE THIS YEAR.

This means the BC Legislature will have sat for only 36 days in all of 2013. Pretty damn pathetic, isn’t it? Guess Premier Clark is a lot like Prime Minister Harper that way–really love to have power, do anything they can to keep it, don’t seem interested in doing much good with it, or even, you know, going into the place where they work. Fantastic.

FAVOURITE FEDERAL MPs THIS YEAR: NATHAN CULLEN AND ELIZABETH MAY

Feb. 16 Cullen_0_0I really really wish Official Opposition House Leader Nathan Cullen had become the leader of the federal NDP. I followed the NDP leadership race and I thought he was fantastic–serious and well-versed in the issues while at the same time totally relaxed and personable. He seems to have that “Jack Layton” spark, unlike Mulcair, who is certainly a worthy opponent for Harper but sometimes reminds me of an angry uncle at a Thanksgiving dinner. I’m hoping Cullen will become a more visible presence as we move towards the next federal election–his personality and BC roots would certainly be an asset in scooping up some more western ridings.

ey336bahz9dtfsm9ungrAs for Elizabeth May, she just rocks. As the leader of the Green Party, she was so determined to become an MP she moved all over the country. Now that she’s an MP (the only one of her party), she refuses to behave as though her lone voice doesn’t matter and takes great care crafting proposals, questioning the government, and attending all votes. She is very very good at keeping the public up to speed about all this (I know this because I receive her e-newsletter and follow her on Twitter even though she is not my MP) and by all accounts, she is one of the most hardworking politicians in Ottawa (unlike certain dubious expense-claiming Senators, cough cough).

Basically, if I lived in May’s riding, there’s a pretty good chance I’d break from my usual commitment to voting NDP and vote for this woman. She’s the politician all politicians should try to be.

THE SENATE EXPENSE SCANDAL

This has been a big one, hasn’t it? Everything to do with the Senate has become so effed up I can see why people are calling for its abolition, which is a real shame because if the Senators actually did their job they could be really really good for Canadian democracy. They may even have prevented some of these horrible omnibus bills from being passed in the last couple of years. Instead, the Senators who were appointed by the ruling party just rubber-stamp whatever legislation the government sees fit to inflict upon the nation and then make us pay for their dubious travel and living expenses. Even when they quit in disgrace they still receive the kind of pensions most of us can only dream about. Democracy at work!

011sen-chamber2So…..that’s kinda what’s been happening in Canadian democracy. There’s more, of course, there’s always more, but this is what has struck me and this is what has stuck. Time to look forward to the next couple years, I guess, and hope things don’t have to get any worse before they start getting better.

[If there’s anything important you think I missed please mention it in the comments section, I’d be interested in knowing what’s important to people who AREN’T me.]

To speak up or shut up, that is the question

/ Lauren / 1 Comment

Jane Austen banknoteLast December, when I wrote a post about casual misogyny on the anniversary of the gender-based massacre at Montreal’s Ecole Polytechnique, I realized, I think for the first time, how much my blog has exposed me. I also got a small glimpse of the sheer, immeasurable, and baffling amount of hatred and anger that exists on the internet, and how much of that, for whatever reason, is directed at women.

I’m not saying that misandry does not also exist on the internet. I am certain that it does, and I do not agree with it, but that being said I have seen nothing to suggest that the amount of misandry on the net is anywhere close to the tsunami of misogynistic vitriol (including rape and death threats) being directed at female bloggers, media personalities, and public figures just for speaking out about an issue that affects them, while also being a woman.

A recent example of this is the case of academic and blogger (and my former school chum) Lucia Lorenzi. After reading reports that UBC frosh leaders from the Sauder School of Business led their students in the now infamous St. Mary’s University Y-O-U-N-G rape chant (and encouraged them to keep it a secret), Lorenzi spoke out. She wrote a passionate and well-researched post on her blog, which led to her being featured in the Vancouver Sun, on CBC’s the National (though much of her interview was cut from broadcast) and as a guest on the Bill Good Show on CKNW. While taking part in outrageous chants is a rite of passage during university frosh weeks Canada-wide, this particular chant is so obscene and so dismissive of the serious issue of rape (“Y is for your sister, O is for oh so tight, U is for underage, N is for no consent…”) I really can’t see what frosh leaders could possibly have been thinking, and you really can’t blame students like Lorenzi for having a major problem with a chant like this being encouraged at the institution where they work, study, and pay tuition (and where many survivors of rape and assault also attend).

But some people do blame her, and women like her. In the few days since her media appearances, Lorenzi has already been receiving nasty messages, and, more worryingly, has been trashed on a well-known and very creepy MRA website as part of a more targeted attack aimed at Denise Ryan, the Vancouver Sun columnist who wrote about the rape chants. To some, it seems, the problem is not the rape chant, which is “tradition” and “no big deal”, the problem is Lorenzi, for being a “bitch” and expressing her outrage (at something that might reasonably spark outrage among both women and men). Even for those who don’t agree with Lorenzi’s point of view, surely harassing her for speaking out only further proves her point that misogynistic attitudes (like those embodied by the rape chant) are present in society and have compromised her right to physical and emotional safety as she pursues her studies and career.

Here’s another example for you: across the pond, the Bank of England revealed plans to replace Elizabeth Fry with Winston Churchill on the new £5 note, meaning the only woman’s face on British currency would be the Queen’s. British journalist and activist Caroline Criado-Perez thought that was a bit crappy, so she spearheaded a successful campaign to have Jane Austen replace Charles Darwin on the new £10 note by 2017. Sounds good, right? Austen is arguably Britain’s most well-known female author, her work is still popular and well-loved (spawning countless film adaptations, mini-series, and literary spin-offs, including the inventive Pride and Prejudice and Zombies), and her popularity (and representation of a certain kind of quaint, genteel England) certainly helps bring tourist dollars (er, pounds) into the country. What’s not to like?

A lot, for some. Surprisingly, there are many people who did not like the campaign at all, and not because they’re just not Jane Austen fans. Within hours of the announcement that her bid to place Jane Austen on the banknote had been successful, Criado-Perez began receiving rape and death threats on her Twitter account. When Member of Parliament Stella Creasy spoke out in Criado-Perez’ defense, Creasy received rape and death threats too (some of them quite graphic). According to their online attackers, it’s not okay to want to see a woman on your currency (even though women form half the British population and make significant contributions to society). It’s also not okay to be a woman who takes issue with another woman receiving rape and death threats. The cause of this shit storm? Apparently, some online trolls are upset about the idea of Jane Austen’s face on the tenner and took the campaign as a form of misandry.

Which is ridiculous. I mean, this is a celebration of JANE AUSTEN, people, not Lorena Bobbitt. How full of hate must you be that you find it justifiable to threaten to kill someone over JANE AUSTEN? (This is not to say you have to like Jane Austen on your money, literary critic Frances Wilson certainly doesn’t, but you’ll notice she’s not planning to rape anyone about it.)

You don’t have to change your entire country’s currency to incur the wrath of internet trolls. Sometimes you just have to be a female gamer. Or a a female student who doesn’t like rape chants, like Ms. Lorenzi. Or a woman who happens to be caught on video protesting for women’s rights. Or a female blogger on a popular website like Jezebel. The fact is that when people notice you speaking up, some of them want to take you down. Even with my tiny readership, I’ve still been afraid to write about this issue because I don’t want to draw negative attention to myself.

I just want to speak. I just want to be able to speak about the things that bother me. And this is something that bothers me–this fear that I have felt whenever I have wanted to blog about certain things. And it’s inherently unfair:

If I speak out, I may draw negative attention to myself. Reading about the experiences of other women makes me hesitant to speak up, which is likely exactly what the trolls who indulge in this kind of heinous behaviour are going for.

If I stay silent because I am afraid, the trolls win.

If I speak up and say that I am afraid, the trolls know that they are successfully frightening women, and they still win.

In my first year of university, I took an introductory course in ethical and political philosophy. My brain just about exploded when I encountered Iris Marion Young’s “Five Faces of Oppression” in my readings–it had never occurred to me that I could be oppressed just because I was a woman. Sure, I knew women in other countries were oppressed (women who couldn’t vote or go to school or wear what they wanted for example), and I knew that women who were in physically abusive relationships were oppressed, and I knew that obviously the wage gap existed and the glass ceiling and all of that. But my mind was blown when I began to grapple with Young’s idea that women in general are oppressed, not necessarily because anyone is actively trying to hurt them or keep them down, but because they live with the constant fear of rape, a fear they are subject to simply for being a woman (whether or not you agree with Young, this idea is incredibly compelling and worth considering). A woman’s choices and behaviour, therefore, must be different from those of her male peers because she is constrained by a threat of violence they are not subject to.

This idea that the threat of rape is a form of oppression translates well to what I see happening on the internet: the threat of gender-based trolling is certainly giving some female bloggers (like myself) pause, and affects what we say and do online. If I say the wrong thing, if I make the wrong choice, I may put my physical and/or emotional safety on the line. And that’s really scary.

I really really like this blog, small as it is. I really like writing about things that are important to me, and sharing those things. Most of the time, I don’t write much that could be considered all that provocative (I think my views are fairly in line with most left-wing Canadian values, so they’re not all that radical, and even if they were, that’s no reason to send someone a death threat), and I don’t feel the need to be provocative. But there are a few blog posts (this one included) that I have wanted to write for a long time, but probably won’t (or not for a much longer time), because whenever I think about the idea of posting them I feel a tug of fear.

So I won’t be writing anything directly about the MRA movement anytime soon, though I think it’s a complicated and incredibly charged topic that deserves as much conversation from as many sides as possible. I won’t be writing about the emotional abuse I experienced at the hands of a romantic partner in my younger days, even though I think it might help people of both genders notice the red flags of emotional abuse earlier on. Unlike the trolls I am afraid of, I do not have the luxury of sending disgusting violent messages to people I don’t agree with, because I’ve attached my real name to my online identity (I think I once told former Heritage Minister James Moore on Twitter that he should be ashamed of himself and I felt bad about it all day–he’s the Industry Minister now; I doubt I hurt his feelings much).

So do I speak up or do I shut up? Do I let the trolls win by staying silent, or do I let the trolls win by letting them know that I’m scared, but in doing so perhaps join a growing chorus of women and make speaking up easier for someone else next time? I guess if I’m writing this post, I’m choosing the latter, though as of this moment I haven’t hit “Publish” yet.

If you’re reading this, I guess I chose “Publish”. I hope the internet’s okay with that. I’m not asking for a flame war here, just the right to safely speak my mind on the website I pay for.

In Body and Soul, I’m Always Going Home

/ Lauren / Leave a comment
Our House (2011 - neither of those cars exist now)

Our House (2011 – neither of those cars exist now)

I am a lucky one. After a recent trip to visit my family in Saskatchewan, I have realized that whether going or coming, whether travelling from Vancouver to the prairie or from the prairie to Vancouver, I am always returning home.

It works like this: I leave the apartment I share with TC, which is home, and get on a plane. My parents pick me up from the airport and take me to the house I grew up in, also known as home. I sleep in my tiny bed in my tiny bedroom and revel in the delicious feeling of being home. At the end of my visit, I wistfully bid my home good-bye and get back on a plane. Several hours later, I reach the door of my home. I sleep in our modest bed in our modest loft and revel in the delicious feeling of being home.

Pretty great, huh?

If they wanted to, I suppose a pedant or a killjoy could point out that I can’t possibly always be going home, especially since one home requires me to have brought a suitcase and one has all my clothes and toiletries in it already. Or, to look at it another way, since one home saw more than 20 years of my life, and the other has been occupied by me for less than two. Perhaps in practice (rather than poetic fancy), my only actual home is in Vancouver, by virtue of my clothes being there, or maybe my only real home is in Saskatchewan, by virtue of the many years I spent there. These observations are valid, but contradictory, and forcing my homes to compete against one another for legitimacy fails to recognize the unique value each home has for me.

Sure, my Vancouver home contains all my stuff (or all the stuff I currently use, at least), but my Saskatchewan home contains all my memories. Sure, my Saskatchewan home sheltered me for more than twenty years, but it is my home with TC (wherever that may be) that will shelter me in my future. If home is where the heart is, and I love both the family I have with my parents and sisters and also my TC (and the potential for a new family that he represents), it is clear my heart is required to be in two places. And it must therefore have two homes.

I realized after completing my BFA that I would likely not be moving back to Saskatchewan. My university friends and colleagues were here in BC, my (mostly imagined) future in the theatre was here, and having never lived or worked in an urban centre in Saskatchewan (where I would likely need to live/work were I to ever return), there were many day-to-day realities of life in a prairie city I would neither recognize nor enjoy. A future in Saskatchewan was, for me, impractical. My future was in BC, and my future home was here also.

But if you want to know where the home of my soul is, where I go to recharge and re-ground myself, I will tell you that it is a brown house in a big yard on the prairie, surrounded by forests and fields and neighbours who’ve known me all my life. I’m an admittedly nostalgic person, but this isn’t just nostalgia, per se, it’s a knowing, deep in my bones, that a certain place belongs to me and I belong to it.

I suspect my sisters feel the same way, which is why we are so aghast whenever my parents renovate the house (designed and built by my dad in the mid-80s). Logically, I understand that 25-year-old carpet should probably be replaced, and I suppose I can’t mind too much when my unused bedroom is re-purposed by my parents for storage and by a particular lazy cat as his favourite place to sleep. I can’t expect my childhood home to remain suspended in time; the house is, after all, a currently occupied (and therefore ever-changing)  place of life and work for my parents, not a museum dedicated to indulging the wistful nostalgia of their children. Sometimes I wonder if my fierce attachments to my recollections of home are somewhat unfair to the actual physical structure, which must bend to reality rather than exist in memory. It’s a lot to ask of a house that it remain the same in every aspect, even as time and weather (and pets) leave their mark on the place, necessitating shocking changes every once in a while, like new shingles and (gasp!) new carpet. I suppose it’s unfair to my parents as well, who have to listen to my griping every time they dare to change their house to suit their needs–the house, after all, that they built and paid for and still live in as their daughters pursue their dreams across the world.

I think my parents should take our attachment to the house and our desire not to see anything changed as a compliment–I imagine when the house was built my parents were hoping to create a home for their family and they succeeded. The truth is, if we had not been so happy we probably wouldn’t care so much. Our home is the stage for our family mythology, a mythology preserved in photographs, Lego sets, favourite old VHS tapes, anecdotes and stories, and yes, in the house itself. Sad as I am to see one home change, I am thrilled by the idea of trying to create such a home and such a happy mythology for my future kids. Isn’t that a wonderful challenge?

Ruby Sparks: A Refreshingly Quirky Film about the Cliche “Quirky Girl”

/ Lauren / 1 Comment

rubysparksYou all know the story: Intelligent Boy-Man has talent but no direction. Intelligent Boy-Man has either no relationship or meaningless ones. Along comes the Quirky Girl. She’s Different. She’s an Individual (you can tell by her blunt bangs/blunt manners). She’s Damaged, but that’s okay, because she Just Might Be What His Life Needs, either indefinitely (a la Sam in Garden State) or just until Boy-Man learns what he needs to learn to become a full-fledged Man (a la Summer in (500) Days of Summer). The Quirky Girl throws Boy-Man a curve ball, spins his world around, and goes swimming in her clothes. And once a Boy-Man meets a Quirky Girl, his life will never be the same.

Ew. Gag me with a spoon.

There was a time (read: before I had any normal adult relationships) when I too found this kind of story appealing. I’m kind of a quirky girl, I thought to myself, I’m no femme fatale but I’m interesting and honest and loving and according to the movies, guys really dig that! In fact, it was once a commonly expressed opinion that the kind of girl worthwhile guys were really looking for was a girl like Natalie Portman’s character Sam from the Zach Braff film Garden State. I used to think it was because she was unpretentious and down to earth, but I noticed that this verbally expressed desire for an authentic lady in hoodies and sneakers didn’t really play out in real life, and these sorts of “Quirky Girl” portrayals have bothered me ever since.

In fact, it wasn’t until watching the 2012 film Ruby Sparks that I was really able to put my finger on why the Quirky Girl motif is so off-putting: it’s just another male fantasy (albeit a less large-breasted one), and Ruby Sparks writer and actress Zoe Kazan not only reveals this Quirky Girl fantasy for what it is, but makes the issue of the Quirky Girl as a male tool/accessory the focal point of the film.

The plot of Ruby Sparks revolves around Intelligent Boy-Man Calvin Weir-Fields (deftly portrayed by Paul Dano, who you might recognize as the silent brother from Little Miss Sunshine). Ten years after penning a best-selling novel at the age of 19, Calvin is stuck. His only major relationship ended in heartache, he has no friends, and has not been able to write anything significant since his breakout success. He’s crushed by others’ perception of his genius, and is terrified of social interaction. In a fit of inspiration, he begins to write a story about a girl he saw in a dream, a Quirky Girl named Ruby Sparks (Zoe Kazan) who opens up his world and loves him just as he is. The more he writes, the more he falls in love with his creation and the more he wants to spend time with her. One morning, Ruby strolls out of his kitchen and Calvin realizes that he has somehow made a real-life woman materialize from his mind; what’s more, so long as he continues writing his story he has the power to change her whenever he doesn’t like the person he has created. The ethics and responsibilities surrounding this kind of fantastical relationship are explored with significant and often uncomfortable implications.

What I find so effective about Kazan’s script is the way that she doesn’t need to go out of her way to point out that the Quirky Girl motif is a male fantasy–her Quirky Girl is a fantasy, pure and simple. What is interesting is how this fantasy plays out in “real life”, and how the male creators of this fantasy react when their ideal begins to examine her partner critically and attempt to make decisions about her life apart from him.

After watching Ruby Sparks, it is interesting to go back to those popular Quirky Girl films and take another look. Is the Quirky Girl really as independent as she appears? Whose interests does her existence in the story serve? Is she really a brand new kind of “strong” female character, or is she just another tired old female trope in bright new tights?

Though the film Garden State will always occupy a special place in my heart as a bildungsroman and a labour of love (two kinds of art I always enjoy) with a pretty wicked soundtrack, it must be said that the oh-so-special female character Sam is not really as strongly written as Zach Braff had probably hoped. Far from being a flesh-and-blood girl that could really exist in real life, Sam is merely a collection of odd-ball character traits wrapped in a super-cute face and body. Her character is a tool to facilitate the growth of the film’s hero, the emotionally-stunted Andrew Largeman (Braff), and she loves him without question, and without any goals of her own.

Zooey Deschanel’s character Summer in (500) Days of Summer is the dark side of the Quirky Girl. Far from being readily available to Tom (played by the always lovely Joseph Gordon-Levitt), Summer is aloof and abrasive, but no more human than the acquiescent Sam. Her character’s disconnect from her family means she is in a better position to focus the majority of her emotional energy on her romantic relationship, if only Tom can convince her he is worth it. When he does not win, Tom is forced to undergo major changes towards a more fulfilling life, and Summer is able to retain her status for him as the One That Got Away, imperfect perhaps but still idealized as well.

So on the one side we have Sam, celebrated because she’s a great sidekick, a cute and feisty little thing who channels everything that she has and is into loving the male hero and facilitating his growth. On the other side we have Summer, celebrated because she is aloof and unattainable–she gives nothing of herself except what is required to force the male hero to struggle and so facilitates his growth. These Quirky Girls are presented in very different packages, but deep down they are two sides of the same coin (heads Always Available, tails Forever Unattainable), and that coin is firmly and forever in the pocket of male fantasy.

Ruby Sparks comes right up the middle and ironically, though she is Calvin’s fantasy, she is, in the end, the most human. Once Calvin decides it is acceptable to control her (because she’s his, he made her), you realize how flawed the male fantasy of the Quirky Girl really is–whimsy and joie de vivre is all well in good if it’s directed towards being sexy-cute and taking your Boy-Man on quirky adventures, but what about what you want outside of your relationship? Is is important? Is it valued as equal to the desires of the Boy-Man, or are your interests/passions/loves only acceptable if they facilitate the improvement of his life in some way?  Though Kazan’s script is kind and offers Calvin an opportunity for redemption, his intense conceit and selfishness is first exposed and his true feelings and impulses surrounding the girl he “loves” are scrutinized.

It would be refreshing, I think, for future Quirky Girl films to examine their motives in a similar fashion, because I’m fairly tired of watching Boy-Men chase Quirky Girls that can’t possibly exist. I’d rather watch them chase unicorns; at least I’d find it less insulting.

Exploring the Past at the Ukrainian Cultural Heritage Village

/ Lauren / 1 Comment
Photo credit: Daina Zilans

Photo credit: Daina Zilans

My (Ukrainian) dad had always wanted to visit the Ukrainian Cultural Heritage Village just outside of Edmonton, Alberta, and this week he got his wish–we were passing through that part of the province with just enough time to get a good look at the place before it closed for the evening, and I’m so glad we did.

For anyone with Ukrainian-Canadian roots (or anyone interested in pioneer Prairie communities), this heritage village (interpreted for the period between 1900 and 1930) is an absolute gem. Costumed role-players “inhabit” the buildings, welcoming visitors into their homes and businesses and making informative conversation in (nearly) flawless Ukrainian accents, and the buildings and farmsteads are authentic down to the last mud puddle and runaway chicken.

My dad and I check out a 1918 granary. Photo credit: Daina Zilans

My dad and I check out a 1918 granary. Photo credit: Daina Zilans

As I child of the Saskatchewan, I am not unfamiliar with heritage villages (the Western Development Museum in North Battleford is not too far from where I grew up, and the Prairies are dotted with old churches, schoolhouses, and railway stations preserved as small-town museums) and I’ve always enjoyed them, but the Ukrainian Cultural Heritage Village is something truly special. Unlike many heritage villages I’ve seen, the buildings at the Ukrainian Village were not cluttered with antiques, instead furnished only with those tools and dishes the families actually would have used and owned. The costumed interpreters, rather than launching into a set “spiel” every time a visitor entered their “zone”, simply welcomed us into their home or business and then made pleasant conversation, providing historical/cultural information only when asked (and always as if they were truly the owner of their home and never from the perspective of a person living after the time period of the building). The interpreters were so thorough I felt uncomfortable wandering into their bedrooms and back porches, feeling as though I was actually trespassing in somebody’s house.

The most impressive details, of course, are always the really basic ones, and ones that other heritage museums often miss in their efforts to keep their sites prim and tidy. For example, many of the farmsteads smelled–there were pigs in the pen and piles of horseshit in the barn and actual slop pails in the houses (sour milk and all–I pity the poor interpreters who sat in hot stinky kitchens all day). The large grassy expanses between the farmsteads were either obviously cut by hand, or not at all, and the roads between the “rural” zones of the heritage village and the town site showed only the narrow wheel tracks of horse-drawn carts and antique trucks. In sights, sounds, and smells, visiting the Ukrainian Village is an incredibly immersive experience, and one my father said brought him back not only to his own childhood farmhouse, but to the farmsteads of his aunts and uncles as well.

My only complaint about the Ukrainian Cultural Heritage Village is that we had only given ourselves an hour to see it, and it is a place I could easily spend the better part of a day.

The "villagers" gather at the end of their work day. Photo credit: Daina Zilans

The “villagers” gather at the end of their work day. Photo credit: Daina Zilans