http://www.matchflick.com/column/2085

Little ones running around (at the highest point): 6

Packages for me that mistakenly got forwarded to Arizona: 1

Days I was sick in bed right before Christmas: 2

Times I thought hell was going to freeze over as boyfriend found himself driving a minivan of kids to church: 1

Presents the boyfriend gave me which he said were not actually presents because they were too geeky and practical but that I’m counting as presents anyway: 2

Children who went down South for Christmas and whom I thus missed: 1

Games I learned how to play for the first time (x-box Simpsons trivia & dominoes): 2

Christmas cards sent out: 0

Asian buffets enjoyed in the aftermath of Christmas: 2

Clean underwear I have with me now: 1

Toffee caramel sundae’s with little mama’s homemade chocolate sauce: 1

Pounds gained in holiday excess: uncertain

Christmas Eves spent with Jonathan Coulton’s “Chiron Beta Prime” stuck in my head: 1

Just this morning, Denise and I received a list of editorial questions regarding our Simpsons book.

Although it’s never fun to deal with these questions, today is the absolute perfect day to be reminded that we are Simpsonologists. Today is the 20th anniversary of The Simpsons.

To be clear, the Simpsons as a family was first seen in 1987, but it was this day 20 years ago that The Simpsons appeared as a show with “Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire.”

Since I had watched The Tracey Ullman Show religiously, I was excited about The Simpsons incarnation and mom and I set up the VCR. Luckily, my mom wasn’t one of those who only saw Bart’s bad behavior (it was in this episode that Bart first said “I’m Bart Simpson, who the hell are you?”). Instead, my mother saw the show as funny and familiar and ultimately celebratory of the nuclear family and of the Christmas spirit.

My mother did not become the fan I did, but she nurtured my interests. (She also allowed me to read The Handmaid’s Tale in high school, after some members of my family said she shouldn’t–this eventually lead to me becoming the President of the Margaret Atwood Society. Surely there are lessons here about parents and permissiveness.) I’ve passed on my fandom to my son, who is 4 years shy of this 20 year anniversary. I also hope that I’ve nurtured things that will flower for him in unexpected ways.

So–happy birthday, The Simpsons! And many more!

the new column is up: http://www.matchflick.com/column/2078

McFarland has our book up! http://www.mcfarlandpub.com/book-2.php?id=978-0-7864-4490-8

The new Matchflick column is up: http://www.matchflick.com/column/2072

In other news, I got a shout out at the Mondavi center last night. I got to meet Eric Weiner, author of The Geography of Bliss before he spoke. In his speech, he referenced a Karma from Bhutan and said that any day when you get to meet a Karma was a good one and that he’d only been able to do it twice–once in Bhutan and once just an hour before. Yea for making the author a great book on happiness slightly happier!

If you know me at all, you know that I had a break-up this year, followed by some prolonged awkwardness as the ex had to be my roommate for several months afterward. I’m a writer and a blogger (those things are not necessarily the same) and I wanted to blog about my frustrations. I also wanted to blog about rekindling with DJ.

I refrained from this out of respect to my ex/roommate. However, I did make a couple of “I’m irked” posts on Facebook, brief status updates. Among other things, I made a comment about him implying that my life would be worthless without a DVR and that he said something that illustrated he was a bit clueless about how I was feeling about a certain subject (and then there was musing about if he had always misunderstood me in that way).

Now someone claiming to be my friend has emailed the ex and told him that I’ve been bashing him. My few comments have been taken out of context and sometimes completely misrepresented. Apparently, this someone says I said my ex made me feel worthless and that I completely insulted his intelligence. This “friend,” who emailed the ex anonymously, claims that he wants to hear the ex’s side since he seems like a good guy.

He is a good guy. Let’s make no mistake about that. He’s one of the best people I’ve ever dated. He’s generous and gregarious and kind.

And now he’s hurting because of someone trying to . . . what . . . help?

It’s all very middle school. Someone is messing with two people while pretending to be caring. As Denise said, it’s like an anonymous note slipped into a locker–“Your ex was dissing you!”

Whoever this is is not my friend. More likely, it’s a disgruntled ex (there are a few on Facebook and one who isn’t my friend on Facebook but who likes to hack into my accounts and cause trouble every now and again). If you think you’re my friend, but you don’t have the balls to tell me what you think of my posts and you go behind my back misrepresenting my posts, then you’re fooling yourself about our relationship.

To my real friends: I have been irritated with each and every one of you. And I have vented about each and every one of you to some of the others of my friends. I’m sure you can say the same.

I’m also certain that my ex has expressed his displeasure about me–he thinks I’m impatient and illogical and a few other things. But whatever he’s said about me doesn’t need to be passed on to me unless he’s actually slandering me in some public way. (Slander, for those who aren’t following the legal distinctions, is lying about someone in a way that could completely ruin their reputation, as opposed to venting).

My ex would never slander me, however, as he’s a wonderful person. In fact, as a person, he’s probably a better person than I am in most ways.

Whoever’s causing this trouble would probably say that I’m the cause of it because I vented. I do take responsibility for that. I did, after all, complain a little and it’s possible to make see harmless complaints as something more than they are. I am certain that the vast majority of my friends saw these posts for what they were–an outlet for frustration, not an out and out attack on my ex.

However, if this person had a problem with them, they should have talked to me or posted comments under my comments in the spirit of open communication. If they did still feel the need to talk to the ex, they should have done so in a non-anonymous way.

Two messages: To my ex, I’m deeply sorry about this.

To my supposed Facebook friend: you should unfriend me. I suggest friending all of those whom I’ve been irked with in the past (after all, with Facebook and my stand-up, I express irritation all the time). Some things to friend: every single person I’ve been on a date with, the South, homophobia, and yourself.

In celebration of Margaret Atwood’s birthday, I’d like to share two poems that feature her name:

Americans Who Read Poetry

We spot each other easily it seems

Something about us wants to be

Bohemian

Which is confirmed when we learn the names of the other’s pet

Atwood

and

Burns

This alone

Will make us sleep together

We don’t need conventional dating

A little talk

Some world music

And off to bed

Our end will not come too unpleasantly

If it comes soon enough

We will be able to hold the other person

In our minds long after

With enough affection to think of them

When flipping through a new journal

We will see a word that reminds us

Of the touch of their mouth

Or maybe just of their dog.

I want to write like Margaret Atwood

or like the poet

at the open mic

who was able to use cuss words

(but not for shock value–

as an intrinsic part of the piece)

Fuck!

How am I supposed to pull it off

Should I go to grad school?

(again)

I know from my poet friends

that suffering is no longer requisite

but that I would need to

watch a lot less t.v.

I might have to abstain from meat

& start to appreciate pomegranates

& persimmons

things that are red

& layered

& symbolic

not just food

An ode to a snickers

is just a jingle,

not something you can

take a bite out of

& hold in your

metaphoric paper mouth.

is here: http://www.matchflick.com/column/2053

In the September 09 edition of Wired, Clive Thompson has a short article in which he basically cites and agrees with Andrea Lunsford (a writing teacher at Stanford) that our students are more literate in the age of facebook and texting–they actually write (even if it’s just tweets) when they aren’t required to by a teacher.

The argument further says that the students understand the idea of audience more because of the “life writing” they do.

I find the argument intriguing, but I have one quick bone to pick. “As for those texting shortforms and smileys defiling serious academic writing? Another myth. When Lunsford examined the work of first-year students, she didn’t find a single example of texting speak in an academic paper.”

Well, I’ve seen it. I’ve actually returned a paper to a student and asked him to spot the error in line four. Even when looking for it, he couldn’t see the “you” is not spelled “u” error because he was so used to texting. While texting speak in academic writing isn’t rampant, it happens.

I’m upset that we would declare something a myth because one teacher didn’t find an example of it from the papers she collected at Stanford. This is a hasty generalization–the sample size is too small and is perhaps not representative of the college population.

Just saying.

The article is here: http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/17-09/st_thompson