“Far away there in the sunshine are my highest aspirations. I may not reach them, but I can look up and see their beauty, believe in them, and try to follow where they lead"
-Louisa May Alcott
I do not get political too often, but certain topics get me riled up. One of them is definitely gay marriage. I do not understand why people feel that it is their right to deny a legal union to someone else. Who are you to pass judgment on them?
I don't even understand how it is illegal. Marriage is a union between two people. What does it matter what sex they are? As long as both people are willing and able, it's their choice to make. It's a personal decision that should not even need to be voted on by a government.
Below is an Irish commercial that conveys this sentiment perfectly. A man goes from house to house asking for his partner's hand in marriage. Because sadly it is up to the people - who vote in the legislators - to decide if this man is allowed to get married. That's just insane.
It's a powerful message. I think that they should make an American version of it. Maybe it will bring the point home for those who disapprove.
All I have to say is that I will be terribly disappointed in the USA if Ireland legalizes gay marriage before us.
My new obsession is the show Glee. I just love it. It's so hilarious.
I also love that they pick a random variety of songs to feature. Although I must say, it has not been great for my budget as I like to go to Itunes and buy songs after watching the show. Oh well, at least they are not that expensive.
One of my favorite moments so far is the Glee version of Gold Digger. I've featured it below. Enjoy!
As promised, it's time to talk about female literary characters. The UK did not do a poll about the most romantic female characters. I think this is because people do not tend to look at the female characters as being the "romantic" ones in literature.
So, I'm listing the 10 feistiest female characters - in my humble opinion of course. Feisty seemed to be a good counterpart to romantic.
Anne Shirley of Lucy Maud's Montgomery's Anne of Green Gables - she's the best. No doubt about it.
Marianne Dashwood of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility - I love Marianne. She's so free spirited and not afraid to leap into life. It ends up almost destroying her, but I still admire her for it.
Becky Sharpe of William Makepeace Thackeray's Vanity Fair - A scheming opportunist for sure but still a very strong female character.
Scarlett O'Hara of Margaret Mitchell's Gone with the Wind - the ultimate strong female character. She's a survivor.
Jo March of Louisa May Alcott's Little Women - she turns down Laurie and conventional life in search of finding her own identity. That's pretty cool!
Isolde of Tristan and Isolde - Tristan is totally to blame for the downfall of this couple.
Jane Eyre of Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre - not many women could handle crazy hidden wives, gypsies, illegitimate children, and public scrutiny and still come out swinging.
Beatrice of Shakespeare's Much Ado About Nothing - She gives Benedict such a hard time and I love her for it!
Elizabeth Bennett of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice - She doesn't settle and I admire that.
Lily Mars of Booth Tarkington's Presenting Lily Mars - a little known book but a great one
Honorable mentions - these aren't quite "literary" characters but I love them anyway.
Hermione Granger of J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series - Harry would have been in deep trouble without her.
Becky Bloomwood of Sophie Kinsella's Shopaholic series - I want to be Becky Bloomwood. Enough said.
Mia Thermopolis of Meg Cabot's Princess Diaries series - I swear when I read these books it's like Meg Cabot knows how I think.
Tatiana Metanova of Paullina Simons The Bronze Horseman - She goes through A LOT in this book and survives. That's feisty.
Last week, I had my annual performance review. It's no secret that I hate any kind of evaluation and I always have. My nerves always get the better of me no matter how confident I feel about my performance.
Lately, I've been thinking about the line between confidence and arrogance. This came up because before every annual evaluation, each employee is asked to fill out a self-evaluation. Self-evaluations are always tricky.
Is it ok to list tasks that you've completed and their impact in all their glory or should you temper it so that you do not appear arrogant? I think this is especially a conundrum for women. Many women are raised not to be "braggers." And in effect, a self-evaluation is exactly that - a place for you to brag about yourself.
It also gives you the chance to remark on where you can improve. But, I think that people tend to focus too much on listing improvements. They don't want to be seen as someone who cannot recognize their own faults. However, they then run the risk of being too hard on themselves and listing weaknesses that might to be considered weaknesses. They can hurt themselves in the long run. Maybe in the end it's better to focus on the positive.
So is self-evaluation time the one time a year that you should throw all thoughts of decorum to the wind and let loose and brag about yourself? I suppose so because if you do not promote yourself to your employer, no one else will.
Recently, the British Telegraph conducted a poll of the most romantic heroes in literature. I personally think that the results of this poll are garbage. That's not to say that the heroes listed are not romantic - some of them definitely are. But the order is all wrong and some fantastic literary characters were left off.
This is the original list - with my color commentary of course.
1. Edward Rochester of Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre- Romantic for sure but he's not my number 1. 2.Richard Sharpe of Bernard Cornwell’s Sharpe series. - I don't even know who this is. 3. Fitzwilliam Darcy of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice- Yes, he should be on the list 4.Heathcliff of Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights- No way! Heathcliff is the worst hero ever. 5.Rhett Butler of Margaret Mitchell’s Gone With the Wind- Hell yeah. But, why is he #5? 6. Mark Darcy, of Helen Fielding’s Bridget Jones’ Diary- Considering he's the modern day #3, I think that this is cheating 7. Captain Corelli of Louis de Berniere’sCaptain Corelli’s Mandolin- yeah, no. 8. Henry DeTamble of Audrey Niffenegger’sThe Time Traveler’s Wife- I love this book but I actually would not include him on this list. Plus I'm not sure this book counts as "literature" 9. Gabriel Oak of Thomas Hardy’s Far From the Madding Crow - I never read this book so no comment. 10. Rupert Campbell Black of Jilly Cooper's The Rutshire Chronicles - Yeah, I never read this book either.
I am still not sure how a British poll could completely exclude Shakespeare. That just seems bizarre to me. Regardless, I've decided to right the wrong of this poll and devise my own list. Here we go!
1. Gilbert Blythe of Lucy Maude Montgomery's Anne of Green Gables- He's truly the perfect hero. Anne is basically a total spaz throughout all the books and runs him around in circles but he still never gives up. 2. Rhett Butler of Margaret Mitchell’s Gone With the Wind- Who doesn't love a rake? 3. Colonel Brandon of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility- He's so patient and that helps him eventually win the girl. How could you not love that? 4. Edward Rochester of Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre- The ultimate tortured soul, which is always romantic. 5. Benedict of Shapekespeare's Much Ado About Nothing - Because he makes me laugh and that is an important trait in my book. 6. Edmund Dantes of Alexander Dumas' The Count of Monte Cristo- Because revenge just makes him that much more attractive 7. Theodore "Laurie" Laurence of Louisa May Alcott's Little Women - Because I cry every time he gets his heart broken when Jo turns down his proposal. 8. Yuri Zhivago of Boris Pasternak's Doctor Zhivago - This book is Russian and tragic so basically it was written just for me. It does bother me that he cheats on his wife though which is why Yuri is down at #8. 9. Fitzwilliam Darcy of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice- I'm a big fan of the whole fight./flirt literary device. 10. Charles Ryder of Evelyn Waugh's Brideshead Revisited - Poor guy can never win.
Honorable Mention: Alexander Barrington of Paullina Simmons' The Bronze Horseman - This is not considered "literature" but it's one of my favorite books and he's awesome so he gets an honorable mention.
I'm an equal opportunist so I'll post soon with a list of my 10 favorite female literary characters. Stay tuned!
Yesterday, I was finishing up the dreaded task of cleaning out my closet. To make this chore more palatable, I decided I needed music. So, I put my IPod on random.
I LOVE when I rediscover music that I forgot about. It's such a nice surprise because you rediscover something fun without actually having to pay for it.
In this case, I came across the song Where I Stood by Missing Higgins. I have no idea where I first heard it but at some point, I downloaded it from ITunes.
It's kind of a sad song (big surprise that I like it, I know) but it's very poignant. Anyway, the music did help me finish up the closet cleaning. Now, it's on to my dresser. . .
After 5+ years of working with the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, the sign above horrified me. I saw it while I was recently in Pittsburgh.
It's an ad for a gun show and the tag line at the bottom says "Get Your Guns While You Still Can."
This annoys me for several reasons.
Who is trying to take their guns away? Not the Brady Campaign. They just want you to buy them legally and pass a background check. And - we can barely get that law enforced. So current and future NRA members of America have no fear that one day guns will be outlawed.
What makes these people think that there is an imminent threat to take away guns? The gun control lobby has been trying to close the gun show loophole for years and nothing has happened. Plus, even if the loophole is closed that does not mean you cannot buy a gun - it would just mean that you have to actually pass a background check to buy it. I'm sure this sounds like a terrible law - we would not want to be able to actually block criminals or terrorists from buying guns. That would be a tragedy.
Does this country really need a "run" on guns because people want to stockpile them in case they are not available in the future? That would make me feel safe. A bunch of people with their own arsenals.
This past weekend, I went to see the play Jersey Boys. I had seen it a few years ago on Broadway and loved it so much that I could not wait for it to tour through DC.
Aside from the great music and story, I think that I really love the play because it is about the culture in which I was raised - that is the New York/New Jersey Italian-American culture. Even though I moved to Maryland when I was 10, my parents brought the culture with us. Plus until a year ago, I had my grandmother to influence me and she definitely was the quintessential little old Italian lady.
On the way home, I started to feel sad. I realized that should I ever have kids, much of that culture will be lost. Most likely, I'll still be in the DC area so that odds of any child of mine visiting the Italian New York neighborhoods are slim to none. He/she will never sit at my grandmother's table in Corona while Lena from next door brings Neapolitan pizza for us to eat with a heavy dose of gossip included. He/she probably will not understand random words in Italian (this knowledge to me was courtesy of my grandmother) since neither my parents nor I speak it. He/she won't be able to enjoy real Italian antipasti complete with capocolla and mortadella - and of course REAL Italian bread not the garbage that they try to pass of as Italian bread south of Jersey.
I guess that's what happens when generations become more and more American. I'm a third generation American, and it would make sense that future generations would become less ethnic. I mean I'm 75% Italian, but unless I were to marry a fellow Italian, my kids will not even be half. That's just so funny to me.
In the area of Jersey where we lived and the areas of New York where my parents grew up, people were pretty much either Italian, Irish, Jewish, or Polish - and everyone knew what they were. Moving to an area with a more blended population, most people did not know their ethnic heritage. This was a huge culture shock to me when I first moved to Maryland since growing up, being Italian was such a part of my identity.
I suppose this identification was helped because I look pretty ethnic. With the exception of my ridiculously pale skin, I'm kind of the poster child for Italian-American women. Plus, my last name is a dead give away. To be honest, I like having those distinguishing factors. It makes me happy to be separate from the pack - I do not like to be just like everyone else.
It will be up to me to try and carry on some of these traditions. For sure, any children of my sister or mine will be told stories about my grandmother growing up in Little Italy. They are going to learn about our connection to John Gotti's incarceration (yes - this is true), and they will be exposed to good Italian food. Any kids related to me will NOT think that the Olive Garden is authentic Italian food. And they will learn how to pronounce Italian names. Nothing annoys me more than when people butcher my name.
So enough venting for today. I'll leave you with the clip for the Jersey Boys' Tony Awards performance.
And yes, I'm already trying to figure out how/when I can see this show again. . .
It was brought to my attention that I missed one of the signs when I posted this article on 9/28. Whoops. Below is the revised post complete with all 9 signs. #7 is the new one. :)
I found this article on yahoo called "9 signs a guy is a keeper." Of course I had to read it! I found it really interesting because sure enough guys that I have dated that failed in these categories were certainly not keepers and vice versa.
Here's the list and my color commentary.
He has his act together - THIS IS SO TRUE!!!! There is nothing worse than dating someone who has no direction or ambition. Plus guys who have not grown up enough to take on responsibility are never going to make for a worthwhile partner.
He puts you first - I think this is true to a point. It's great to know that a guy is considering you when he makes decisions, but occasionally you do need to put yourself first. That goes for both members of the relationship. It's give and take.
He's not afraid of your germs - very true. Nothing worse than having someone avoid you when you are sick and already feel awful. That's when you need someone to show up with orange juice and chicken soup.
He's a family man - This is very important to me as my family is extremely important in my life. Interest in my family garners major bonus points. Plus, you can definitely tell someone's character by how they treat their own family.
He makes time for your friends - If the boyfriend and friends are a bad mix - the relationship is in trouble. Enough said.
He's your biggest cheerleader - I agree with this one a lot. It is important that you feel your partner is happy when you are successful. There is nothing worse than being afraid to tell someone that something good happened because you are afraid of his jealousy.
He remembers the little things. - I have to admit that it is nice when someone remembers small stuff like what you have planned for the week, what kind of wine you like, your favorite song, or where you last went on vacation. Stuff like that shows that he pays attention when you talk. That's nice.
He's happy when you are happy - In general, I think this refers to compromise. The guy should be willing to do something that he does not want to do just because the girl wants to. And vice versa.
He makes you the best you can be - This is very important. The guy should help build you up not knock you down. When you are with him, you should feel confident and happy not insecure and miserable.
I definitely think that these apply to women as well. As much as it would be nice if everything revolved around the girl (i.e. me), that's not going to make for a successful relationship. It has to be a two way street!
I have more to say about Bright Star. Yes, John Keats' decisions did annoy me - see yesterday's post - but the story of his love for Fanny Brawne is also incredibly romantic.
This is the poem he wrote for her (she was his bright star).
Bright Star
Bright star, would I were stedfast as thou art-- Not in lone splendour hung aloft the night And watching, with eternal lids apart, Like nature's patient, sleepless Eremite, The moving waters at their priestlike task Of pure ablution round earth's human shores, Or gazing on the new soft-fallen mask Of snow upon the mountains and the moors-- No--yet still stedfast, still unchangeable, Pillow'd upon my fair love's ripening breast, To feel for ever its soft fall and swell, Awake for ever in a sweet unrest, Still, still to hear her tender-taken breath, And so live ever--or else swoon to death. - John Keats
All I have to say is that it is no wonder she was never able to get over him after he died.
Last night I went to see the movie Bright Star. It's about the romance and eventually death of the poet John Keats. Needless to say, I cried like a baby.
This movie is a great example of one of my giant pet peeves about the male psyche. It drives me insane how men think that by being noble and self-sacrificing they are somehow going to save women pain. Well, a newsflash to all men out there - IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.
John Keats was a great example. He falls in love with Fanny and then realizes that they can never marry because he has no money. So he tries to push her away. Then he realizes he is dying and comes back to her only to leave her again because he does not want her to watch him die.
There are many things wrong with this situation.
Once you are involved with someone, you are involved. There is no room for second thoughts. It's not like he suddenly was going to come into money and poof problem solved. If he knew he could never marry, then he should have stayed away from Fanny. Don't start something that you cannot finish!
Why oh why would he think that she would care that he had no money. When a woman loves a man, she will not let anything get in the way. She finds a way to make it work. In this situation, John Keats had such a narrow focus. He could not think outside the box to figure out a way for them to be together so instead they both remained miserable.
Why on earth would he think that going to Italy to die would make things easier? It just cheated them out of their last moments together. It's not like Fanny was able to be like "oh I don't love John anymore because he is in Italy." Being apart probably made his death harder not easier for her. In effect, John did her a great disservice.
This stupid idea of nobility does no one any good. It only makes things harder for the couple involved. Stopping a relationship out of some misguided sense of self-sacrifice does nothing but create misery. Is either party really going to be able to just flip a switch and move on? No. They are just going to suffer apart instead of working on things together.
In my opinion, this idea of separating for the good of the other person is a point of weak character. It shows that 1) the person is not willing to find a way around the obstacle and 2) the person does not believe enough in the relationship to think that it can survive outside of ideal circumstances.
Truly, Keats sold Fanny short. And sadly it has been a theme throughout history and literature. Maybe I'll write a novel where the guy actually does the correct thing - i.e. talk to the other person and work out the problem.
But, I guess no one would read that book or see that movie. It would not have enough drama. I mean I did pay $10 to cry my eyes out while watching Keats die and Fanny have a breakdown over his death. It would not have had the same emotional punch and it been a movie about conversation instead of miscommunication. . .
I am not a huge fan of January Jones - the actress or her character on Mad Men - but I absolutely LOVED her outfit in last week's episode. This is the outfit that she wore during the Rome sequence of the show.
It's just so chic. The shoes, dress, jewelry, even the 60s hair just work so well together. I'm inspired!
Here's to hoping that the show has more European sequences so that we can see more awesome clothes!!
Ever since I first saw the movie Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, I've wondered if I had the opportunity, would I chose to erase some memories?
To be honest, I go back and forth.
At times, I think that I would erase the most painful ones. Why relive them in my mind if I do not have to? I do tend to dwell so if I can forget terrible, humiliating, or painful things that have happened to me, wouldn't I be better off? Only having positive and happy memories with which to focus sounds like a great thing to me.
Other times, I think that experiences and memories make you the person that you are. Remembering unpleasant times, helps you to better appreciate happy times. Also, you grow as a person with each experience - good or bad - so in effect you are the sum of your memories. If you cut out a whole bunch of them, does that make you less of a person?
I also wonder if I would end up like Kirsten Dunst's character in the movie. Her character erases bad memories and then ends up making the same choices that lead her down the unpleasant path. Would that happen to me? If I did not have the bad memories to learn from, would I be doomed to repeat the same mistakes?
In the end, I do not know what I would do. I have a ridiculously good memory, which I often say is both a blessing and a curse. For although I do remember good things, I also remember in excruciating detail all of the bad and painful things in my life. By this fact alone, I know I would be extremely tempted to erase those bad memories. The very thought of never having to relive them would be too tempting. But, I am also an overly cautious person so I would problem fear losing the good memories with the bad. In the end, I'm not sure what would win out - temptation or caution.
It's a tough question and one that I think about a lot. I guess I'm lucky that this technology does not actually exist. It can remain a hypothetical debate in my head.
This game is addictive. I read about it on Twitter and stupidly clicked on the link. Now I am completely obsessed. It's a lot of fun though. Check it out!
Over the last week, I saw two amazing Irish Bands in concert.
On Friday night, I went to see Snow Patrol. They were incredible. They sang my favorite song of all time - Open Your Eyes - which made me super happy. We also had pretty good seats which were a plus.
The Plain White T's opened for them, and they were also fantastic. It did kind of suck that we sat in the wrong seats for the entire opening act and had to endure a bright light in our eyes for no reason but whatever. The music was good so that's all that counts.
On Tuesday, I went to see U2 in concert. It was AWESOME!!!! I think that Bono is the epitome of cool so to have the opportunity to see him perform live was just amazing.
They sang such a good mix of music too. Lots of the old stuff and a few of their newer songs which I like - Vertigo, Elevation, etc. The encore included Where the Streets Have No Name and With or Without You, which are two of my favorites. In my opinion, With or Without You is one of the most romantic songs ever written.
During the show it was pretty cold outside, but we did not care. It was worth a little discomfort and a ton of traffic to see the show. And as a plus, the opening band was Muse. They sang the 2 songs that I really like so all was well.
What are the odds of seeing 4 amazing bands for the price of 2 and hearing all of my favorite songs by each band? What a fantastic week.
Here's a clip from the U2 Concert. This is With or Without You. So awesome.
