Retail Therapy

This week has been a little nutty - work, personal, etc. It's all a little bit crazy. As a result, I feel like I'm in a bit of a funk. And how do I usually break myself out of a funk?

I shop.

But, I'm trying not to shop as much. Not for a noble reason like I should be saving money to buy wedding stuff. But for a more practical reason which is that if Mike and I are going to be moving into my condo, I have to get rid of stuff not buy more stuff. Yes, we'll put some stuff in storage, but I really should try and cut back on buying more stuff as much as I can.

Normally, when I'm in a funk I usually buy myself one of three things - a book, a piece of clothing, or a handbag. (yes I get that there's a huge price difference in this mix). And, what you may ask currently accounts for about 90% of my possessions and thus the bulk of what I have to get rid of?

You guessed it - books, clothes, and handbags.

And what do I want to buy myself to get out of my funk?

right again - a handbag.

This one to be precise.


It's from Anthropology. I haven't bought it yet, but it's tempting me. It would be so cute for the summer! Bright and happy. With lots of space.

We'll see how much I can resist. I mean would it really take up that much room?

Color Personality Quiz

Recently, I took a color personality quiz. The results were pretty interesting. My top two categories - creator and organizer fit well with my current job which is basically advertising/public relations.

I guess I picked a good career. . .

Here are the full results:

Best Occupational Category

You're a CREATOR

Keywords

Nonconforming, Impulsive, Expressive, Romantic, Intuitive, Sensitive, and Emotional

These original types place a high value on aesthetic qualities and have a great need for self-expression. They enjoy working independently, being creative, using their imagination, and constantly learning something new. Fields of interest are art, drama, music, and writing or places where they can express, assemble, or implement creative ideas.

CREATOR OCCUPATIONS
Suggested careers are Advertising Executive, Architect, Web Designer, Creative Director, Public Relations, Fine or Commercial Artist, Interior Decorator, Lawyer, Librarian, Musician, Reporter, Art Teacher, Broadcaster, Technical Writer, English Teacher, Architect, Photographer, Medical Illustrator, Corporate Trainer, Author, Editor, Landscape Architect, Exhibit Builder, and Package Designer.

CREATOR WORKPLACES
Consider workplaces where you can create and improve beauty and aesthetic qualities. Unstructured, flexible organizations that allow self-expression work best with your free-spirited nature.

Suggested Creator workplaces are advertising, public relations, and interior decorating firms; artistic studios, theaters and concert halls; institutions that teach crafts, universities, music, and dance schools. Other workplaces to consider are art institutes, museums, libraries, and galleries.

2nd Best Occupational Category

You're an ORGANIZER

Keywords:

Self-Control, Practical, Self-Contained, Orderly, Systematic, Precise, and Accurate

These conservative appearing, plotting-types enjoy organizing, data systems, accounting, detail, and accuracy. They often enjoy mathematics and data management activities such as accounting and investment management. Persistence and patience allows them to do detailed paperwork, operate office machines, write business reports, and make charts and graphs.

National Guilt

I've been thinking a lot lately about the concept of national guilt. It's a subject that first became interesting to me when I read the book The Reader.

Unlike the movie version, the book The Reader focuses more on the post-WWII generation in Germany coming to terms with the actions of their parents' generation. It's an interesting phenomenon. How do you accept the shameful actions of your country's past? How do you have pride in a country that has done such awful things? But, if you have no national pride, what keeps the country and people together? Is national pride and therefore the denial of national guilt necessary for the advancement of a culture?

Recently, I read the book Sarah's Key. I found this book to be particularly interesting because it focused on a subject of which I knew nothing. That is the Vel d'Hiv round-up in Paris in July 1942. This round-up effectively sent thousands of Jews to their deaths. Jews that were forced from their homes, taken into custody, and sent to gas chambers by the French police - not the SS. It was the French imprisoning the French.

Of course, the round-up is a shocking and horrific action, and the part of the book that describes the events is particularly heartbreaking.

But, what I found to be fascinating in the book was the feelings of the witnesses. So many people witnessed these round-ups and did nothing to stop them. Realistically, they probably could not have stopped them, but no one even seemed to try. The people who lived near the Vel d'Hiv and knew that thousands of people were being held hostage in the building, did nothing. Sure, some people tried to sneak in some food but that was the extent of their assistance. From the description of the event in the book as well as research that I did after reading it, it seems like most French citizens turned away and pretended that they had no idea what was going on. They pretended not to know why apartments were suddenly vacant or why areas of the city - Jewish areas - were empty.

After the war, it seemed that the witnesses tried to forget these events. When forced to remember, they placed blame on others - namely the Germans - and not on themselves or their countrymen. In fact it took an entire half a century for the French government to recognize the part of its people in these actions. To accept blame. To acknowledge guilt.

It's true that all cultures have historic actions of which they are or should be ashamed. America is no different. You just have to look to the Trail of Tears, slavery, and the Iraq War for examples.

And I suppose that the only way to move beyond the knowledge that your country - or yourself - participated in such actions is to either forget the actions occurred or place the blame on others. Otherwise, how do you live with yourself?

If I was still in school, I think I would be moved to research and write on this topic. I may still do the research aspect as I truly find this phenomenon fascinating. It would be very interesting to look at parellels in Roman history, German history, French history, American history, Russian history, etc to see how powerful cultures that perform abhorrent actions manage to persevere. Do their people feel a sense of national guilt? How do they overcome it? Is regaining the sense of national pride integral to the future success of a nation?

I'm not sure that there are any clear cut answers but I do find the concept to be an intriguing one.

2010

I cannot believe that we are already 2 weeks into 2010. That's just crazy to me. Time is flying by.

This year is already off to an interesting start. If anyone had told me at the start of 2009 what I would be doing at the start of 2010 - I would have thought that they were crazy. It's amazing how quickly life changes - for both the good and the bad although in my circumstances it's for the good at the moment.

2010 is bound to bring many surprises, but I have a good feeling about it. I've decided not to make any resolutions this year, but I have decided to set a goal. Some people may think that resolutions and goals are one in the same, but I disagree. I think a goal is something that you systematically work toward whereas a resolution is something that you just decide to do. And let's face it, resolutions are all too easy to break.

My goal for 2010 is to strive to have a better work/life balance. I will be the first to admit that I can put work in front of anything else. And while I do not plan to start slacking off at my job, I am going to work to shift my focus to a more equal balance between my personal and professional life. Who knows that could actually make me more efficient at work. We'll see!

Happiness

Happiness is a funny thing. It kind of sneaks up on you. I do not think that the average person - myself included - is happy at all times. I think that normally people are content and true happiness is something that comes upon us on occasion. If we are lucky, those occasions are frequent.

I do not at all mean that being content is a negative state. I think that it's a very good thing. If people had a dopey grin of happiness at all times, they would cease to be productive members of society. Contentedness is a great state - it means that you are satisfied with your life and in a state of peace.

I also think that most people do not sit around thinking about the state of their happiness. I know that I don't. But during the most random moments - driving the car, shopping for groceries, etc - you realize that you are truly happy. When that realization dawns, it's quite a treat. You feel a certain glow come upon you. It sounds cheesy, but I've experienced it and it's definitely true.

I wish that you could bottle up that feeling. It would be nice to be able to experience it whenever you wish. Bad day at work? Take a nip of happiness and you are good to go. Sadly, life does not work that way.

But maybe, that's to our benefit. If people felt that glow of happiness at all times, it would cease to be an incredibly special feeling. And that's what makes it such a joy and something to be treasured.

What Makes Family Family

I've been thinking a lot about what makes a family a family. Over the past few weeks, the question seems to be following me through personal relationships, books, and television shows.

In the current book club book, a man who has no biological relationship to his ex-stepdaughter feels and acts like more of a father to her than her adopted father. People in his life think that is strange. But if he loves this girl as a daughter, why should he not treat her as such? (the fact that she's a manipulative brat has no bearing on this conversation but it does impact my enjoyment of the novel).

In both the TV show Brothers and Sisters and in the situation of a colleague, a gay couple is having a baby via a surrogate. I think that this is great. They are making their own family - biology mostly aside. Why should families only be traditional? As long as people are happy and children are loved, how can that be bad?

I've decided that family has little to do with biology and everything to do with personal connection. A great example of this is my immediate family's current relationship with my father's extended family. Basically, we no longer have one - and I don't miss them. How can you miss people that are cruel enough to throw a 90 year old woman (my grandmother) out of the house?

What I have realized is that my extended family is now my friends. Biology has nothing to do with my connection to these people, but they are family all the same. In the end, your family consists of the people that you can count on. If I was in trouble, I would never call my cousin Maria for help, but I would call one of my close friends. Why? Because I know that they would be there and that's what family does. Biology has nothing to do with it.

Being Italian

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. . .

John Keats and the Stupidity of Nobility

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.

1. 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!
2. 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.
3. 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. . .

Erasing Memories

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.

Celebrations

Friday was Mike's birthday. We had a fun celebration and had an interesting discussion about celebrations in general.

I LOVE celebrations but only if they are not focused on me. I'm not a huge fan of being the center of attention. But I love to make a big deal out of birthdays and holidays for other people.

That's not to say that I do not love my own birthday. It's always a blast to go out to dinner with friends or family. I really like that my friend Lori's birthday is close to mine so we can kind of celebrate together. My mom's birthday is also close to mine so we usually combine the family celebration. It's more fun for me that way. I still get to enjoy it without the pressure of having people stare just at me.

My favorite celebrations are around the holidays. I love Thanksgiving and Christmas. It's just so much fun to get everyone together. I love all of the decorations too. There is nothing more fun for me than decorating a tree. I like to take out each ornament and remember when I bought it or a memory that I associate with it.

Yes, I am a very nostalgic person.

But it's more than just decorations. Usually people are much happier around the holidays and I like that. There is a certain sense of fun that is not always present throughout the year. It would be great if we felt festive all year round, but I guess that is a pipe dream.

What Does Your Home Say About You?

A friend and I were having an interesting conversation about what your home says about you. Many people - myself included - feel that their home reflects a lot about them. If you look closely, it can be a peek into one's soul.

The question becomes - how closely do people look? I tend to be observant about these things and pick up on the vibe of a place. I notice the presence or absence of photos. The choice of wall color. The selection of art on the walls. Does the person have knickknacks? If so then in my opinion, they are probably sentimental and attribute memories to each item.

The other question is who do you allow to have this glimpse into your personality? I really hate when people come to my home and then start judging my stuff? "Oh that painting is . . . interesting." "I'm guessing that yellow is your favorite color."

On the other hand when someone is like "that's a really cool painting" or "I love this book too!" It makes me feel closer to them. I suppose it's a double-edged sword.

I asked my friend what she thinks my place says about me and this is what she said, "I think your apartment says you like yellow, Broadway, books, and movies that you are an organized and friendly person and very bright and warm."

I am not sure I would have used these same words to describe my apartment - although they are very flattering. Maybe each person who visits has a different perception.

If that's the case, it will be interesting to see what others think! I hope it's all good stuff. . .

Failure to Communicate

I just finished the book The House at Riverton by Kate Morton. It was a really good book. Slow to start but I eventually got really into it.

What bothered me about the story is that everything would have worked out if the characters had just TALKED to one another. Shocking concept I know. If Grace had told Alfred her fears and her suspicious, they would not have had to wait 40 years to be together. If Hannah had been honest with anyone, the tragedy that happens at the end might not have occurred. Everyone was unhappy because no one knew the full story.

I suppose it's easy to sit back and judge others for failing to communicate. It's hard to lay your feelings and thoughts out there for others to pick apart. I think that as human beings we fear rejection and mockery too much to be that open. But if we could be, it would solve so many problems.

I am guilty of this myself. Rarely do I tell others what I am truly thinking. Usually I manage to internalize many of my own thoughts and feelings in an effort not to cause trouble for others. Occasionally, I get so upset or aggravated that it all spills out, but that is definitely more the exception than the rule. I wonder if my failure to be completely open and communicative has lead to misunderstandings with people. If so, what have I missed out on? Or what did I make someone unintentionally think?

Those kind of "what if" questions will drive me nuts.

Cheater, Cheater Pumpkin Eater

I was watching TV last night and in the show this character that I really like just had her boyfriend cheat on her. The whole episode was then about whether or not she could forgive him. This got me thinking about whether I would be able to forgive someone for cheating on me.

Luckily, I have never been in a relationship where someone has cheated on me (at least that I know of). And I think that is probably for the best. I do not believe that I would be able to forgive a guy for cheating on me. I mean if he could knowingly hurt me like that, then how could I ever trust him again?

In general, I do not believe that issues are completely black and white. Most situations call for a grey area. But what could be the grey area be in cheating? It's wrong however you look at it. If you are in a relationship with someone then you need to be faithful. To me, it's just that simple.

Would some consider me hard and unforgiving for having that stance? I generally think of myself as an understanding person, but I think that is one issue that infidelity is one issue that I would not be able to get past. Does that show strength of character or the absence of tolerance? Is it cold-hearted to refuse to try and work through a problem and forgive the person or does tossing the guy out and moving on show backbone?

To be honest, I hope that this is a situation that I never have to confront. It's easy to speculate what I might do but if it were to happen to me, I might find myself going through some internal battles. Let's hope that I continue to date non-cheaters. . .

Fake it 'Til You Make It

I'm sure you have heard the expression "fake it 'til you make it." I never realized quite how much I live by that expression until recently.

Whenever I feel awkward or uncomfortable, I am very good about turning on a smile and making small talk. In many ways, I am a master at small talk. I'm usually able to find something that I can chat with a person about. It does not matter if I even find the particular subject interesting - just having something to chat about alleviates my awkwardness. It lightens the situation and allows me to appear engaging and gregarious. Normally, I am a complete basket case on the inside but as long as I do not appear that way - things are good.

In my opinion, the "fake it" mentality is great for networking at industry events. Let's be honest - rarely are people genuine at industry functions. Unless you are chatting with friends, people usually have some kind of agenda. Whether they are trying to figure out how to get business out of you or trying to get gossip about a mutual colleague from you, there is some master plan. But this is ok because most people know the game and can choose to play or not to play.

In personal relationships, the "fake it" mentality can be trickier. If you act somewhat carefree and completely comfortable in someone's presence when in fact you are not, then it can lead to misunderstandings. The person might think that you are so casual that you don't really care about them (because it's too much too soon). Or, they might think that you are shallow and have no capacity for serious conversations because you stick to chatting about inane subjects.

Personally, I think that it is usually a defense mechanism. It's easier to keep people at arm's length until you process your feelings toward them. When you let someone know your true feelings about various things, you let them get closer too you. When someone becomes close to you, they have the power to hurt you. I think that many people - myself included - do not want to give just anyone this power. You need to first decide if this person is worthy of trust. Can you trust them to accept you for who you are? Are they able to accept how you feel about various things without mocking you?

Not everyone that you meet is going to be worthy of this trust. In the past, I know that I've trusted people who were not worth the effort. Those experiences make you wary of opening up to the next person. That does not mean that you stop through. Just that you are more careful the next time. Being selective isn't a bad thing. It's all about self preservation.

That said I think that the "fake it til you make it" philosphopy usually gets a bad rap. But I believe that in many situations, it's the way to go. It buys you some time to process your own feelings. Just don't wait too long. Eventually you have to become genuinely comfortable or else you'll be faking life forever. Or, you will lose someone that you care about because of your fear of opening up. And that would be a shame.