Monday, August 1, 2011

London Poems

VAN GOGH’S SUNFLOWERS

Mom always wanted a copy of this painting.

Yellow, she said, was her favourite colour.

The golden sunflowers droop, full blown over the lip of the saffron vase,

Arching towards the olive tabletop.

Set against an icterine background,

The yellows are dull yet hopeful,

And stenciled in cerulean on the vase, a name:

Vincent.


----

THE PARTHENON MARBLES

I have not often contemplated eternity in a block of stone.

Scenes of glory and bloodshed,

Etched, erased and preserved by the hands of masters:

Sculptors, time, historians.

With Keats before me and millions after,

I write to create, to preserve.

And we hope that one day our work will be as precious.


----

UNTITLED

Zeus dominates the skyline,

His rod of lightning stretching every higher.

Poseidon rules in the Thames,

Quenching the thirst of the metropolis.

Hades blows his foul hot breath through the tunnels of the Underground.


----

CITY GIRL

“It took no practiced eye to see at a glance

that the Londoner was different…”

Sixty-seven years ago

These words were written about a time

Three-hundred and fifty years before.

Another time, an older age,

As true today as ever.

The Londoner is quick but unhurried,

Busy but not frantic.

She spends her leisure in the shops, in the streets, in the park –

Shopping, socializing, sunbathing – when the weather permits.

She is call, collected, cool,

Even in the face of the pushing, sultry, sweaty crowds aboard the evening Tube.

She has learned not just to survive, but how to live in her world of speed and quickness.

She is who I want to see in the mirror.


----

THE ENGLISH VOICE

The English voice

Is at once softer and more harsh than its American cousin.

Clipped consonants, rounded vowels,

The sound of eloquence to my untrained ears.

The sound of drama, conditioned by the BBC,

At once soothing and frightening,

Strange and familiar.


----

PORTRAIT OF AN UNKNOWN LADY

High on the wall

In a great gilt frame

She sits by her window,

Her raven hair curling over one bair shoulder.

Her gown of brown and blue is simple,

Different from the others Peter Lely has painted:

Barbara Palmer, the Countess of Castlemaine,

Frances Stewart, the Duchess of Richmond,

The mistresses of Charles the Second.

But her face is the same as theirs,

Her hair coiffed à la mode in Lely’s familiar style.

She could be Moll Davis or Nell Gwynne,

But there’s no way to tell –

Lely’s faces all look the same.


----

CAPTURED

A spiderweb.

An impassable labyrinth of asphalt and cobblestone.

It will reach you from across the world,

And pluck you out of your comfortable suburban life

And consume you.

Spires of steel, glass, and chrome,

The skyscrapers look soft against the jagged iron and Gothic sandstone of churches

and castles.

And fluttering over all, the Union Jack.

You will wander,

And just when you think you’ve found your way

You realize you’re lost.

Eventually you’ll get out,

And you’ll return home,

But you will never escape.

You will never be free.


----

EAST COAST LINE

Faster and faster,

Like magnets,

Pulling us forward in one long, straight line

Until we reach our destination,

Our destiny.

Pulling us inexorably forward,

And we cannot return.

The rail lines cross the country in every direction –

North, South, East, West –

And we travel blindly

Through space,

Through time,

Not knowing that we can never return to the exact place from whence we left.

Past the windows of the train,

Images flash:

Farms, villages, castles, the North Sea.

Slide projections of our lives,

Snapshots of memory

Seen for an instant and gone forever.


SHERWOOD FOREST

Dappled earthen floor,

Shadows in the shape of aspen and oak leaves.

This is a place of magic.

Robin and his merry men once ran here.

Still I hear their whispers

Echoed by the shifting branches overhead.

In a forest as old as the world

And green as anything,

Wet under an eternally gray sky,

I sip coffee and contemplate my own insignificance,

And the oak trees drop rainwater on my head.


----

Haiku Sequence

Sidewalk of Baker Street

Gum-splattered pavement,

All twenty-six shades of grey,

Sticking to my shoe.

On the Way to the Station

A touch on my head,

Unexpected in grey light:

Early morning bird poop.

Evening Tube

Warm bodies press close,

The humid breath of hundred

Fills the Underground.

Baker Street Station

The stench of years past

In Underground’s unmoving air –

Coal dust in my eye.

The Heath

Untouched for centuries,

Growing and green in the city,

Stretch of wilderness.

Waking Up

Laying in bed,

Hazy moon in the window.

Last day in London.

Numbered

The twelfth day of May,

Six pounds and seventeen steps,

Three rooms in 221B.


----

221B

Mecca in a three-room flat

Crammed impossibly full

Of reality mixed with dreams.

Tourists, worshippers, disciples

Cross the world to visit this place.

The table set for two--

Ignored in favor of the old violin

And the softly simmering test tubes on the table in the corner.

The smell of tobacco, formaldehyde, and rain

Has been smothered by the sell of cross trainers and perfume,

But the rooms remain untouched,

Everything in its rightful place,

Just as shrines are wont to be.


----

REALLY?

Is there really such a thing as reality?

Surely not here.

Not here where Robin ran,

Where Harry hunted,

Where Sherlock sleuthed.

These places,

I thought,

Existed only in stories.


----

TWO MONTHS LATER

The last night,

Standing on the corner of Marylborn and York Gate.

The sky overhead looked like water,

Blue and shaded, rippled by the wind.

Cars streamed by, red and white lights a blur in the darkness.

I tried to memorize every detail –

The cool evening breeze,

The way the air smells of grass and water and petrol,

The rushing silent sound of city traffic.

But even now it’s just a memory.

Was I ever really there?

Friday, July 22, 2011

I seem to recall I once said, " It’s not often that I wish for the impossible, but if only I could have had a bit more time."

I seem to be wishing that a lot more now.

School starts a month from today. This has officially been the shortest summer of my life.

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Love Your Body

Re-blogged from Shannon and Operation Beautiful.

This list is wonderful and amazing and I think everyone everywhere should read it. The end.

  1. Think of your body as the vehicle to your dreams. Honor it. Respect it. Fuel it.
  2. Create a list of all the things your body lets you do. Read it and add to it often.
  3. Become aware of what your body can do each day. Remember it is the instrument of your life, not just an ornament.
  4. Create a list of people you admire: people who have contributed to your life, your community, or the world. Consider whether their appearance was important to their success and accomplishments.
  5. Walk with your head held high, supported by pride and confidence in yourself as a person.
  6. Don’t let your weight or shape keep you from activities that you enjoy.
  7. Wear comfortable clothes that you like, that express your personal style, and that feel good to your body.
  8. Count your blessings, not your blemishes.
  9. Think about all the things you could accomplish with the time and energy you currently spend worrying about your body and appearance. Try one!
  10. Be your body’s friend and supporter, not its enemy.
  11. Consider this: your skin replaces itself once a month, your stomach lining every five days, your liver every six weeks, and your skeleton every three months. Your body is extraordinary–begin to respect and appreciate it.
  12. Every morning when you wake up, thank your body for resting and rejuvenating itself so you can enjoy the day.
  13. Every evening when you go to bed, tell your body how much you appreciate what it has allowed you to do throughout the day.
  14. Find a method of exercise that you enjoy and do it regularly. Don’t exercise to lose weight or to fight your body. Do it to make your body healthy and strong and because it makes you feel good. Exercise for the Three F’s: Fun, Fitness, and Friendship.
  15. Think back to a time in your life when you felt good about your body. Tell yourself you can feel like that again, even in this body at this age.
  16. Keep a list of 10 positive things about yourself–without mentioning your appearance. Add to it!
  17. Put a sign on each of your mirrors saying, “I’m beautiful inside and out.”
  18. Choose to find the beauty in the world and in yourself.
  19. Start saying to yourself, “Life is too short to waste my time hating my body this way.”
  20. Eat when you are hungry. Rest when you are tired. Surround yourself with people that remind you of your inner strength and beauty.

Friday, July 8, 2011

Podcast Thoughts

I've been listening to podcasts a lot at work lately - lots of long-ish projects as it's a new month - and even though it's too late to write/call in to the podcasts and tell them my opinion, I decided I'd share it on my blog.

While listening to The Transmission, I realized that I'd never picked a "favourite moment" from LOST. Then I realized that the one single moment that got me hooked on the show was the moment I saw the "LOST" title come floating out of the darkness. The eerie music and the way the logo floats in and out of focus hooked me instantly.

A while back, Empire magazine did a video (posted below) showing the cast of Harry Potter describing the series in 1 word. So here's my word:
Transcendent
Yep. That's my word.

Alrighty, it's 1:30 and I have to work tomorrow...today? Anyway, in 7 hours, so I REALLY should go to bed...

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Mid-Summer Update

If I had something interesting to write about, I'd probably do it.

I know everyone is anxious to hear about London, but I was really looking forward to having pictures to show off and that just doesn't seem to be happening any time soon...

Here, a quote from my London Journal to tide you over until I get my photos:

9 May - Monday - Day 1 - 19:00 (7:00 pm) - atop Primrose Hill
This is what home feels like. I'm not shocked to be here because I know this city already. And because I know I'll be back someday. There's not even a doubt in my mind anymore. I will be back. This city doesn't look new, it looks familiar. I've never been less shocked to see a new place, and I think it's because I already know this place is not new. It's home. It's already home. Not shocking, not new. Exciting, yes.
And another, because I'm on a roll:

14 May - Saturday - Day 6 - 14:15 (2:15 pm) - my room
I've been many places I thought were home. But everything about those places, everything I loved is already here. This is the centre of my world. Harry Potter is here, Sherlock Holmes is here, Jekyll and Hyde is here. Everything I have ever wanted is here and, as we all know, there is only one thing that could make it better.
And a little list of interesting things I saw (and would have pictures of if my camera was alive):
  • The Rosetta Stone
  • Lily & James Potter's house
  • Snape's potions classroom from movie 1
  • Buckingham Palace
  • 221b Baker St.
  • Paintings by Monet and Van Gogh
  • Rosslyn Chapel
  • Edinburgh Castle
  • Elephant House café - "the birthplace of Harry Potter"

I'm sure I'll write more later. If I remember.

Lately, I've just been working. Got a job at dad's office, doing "office assistant" type stuff. *shrug* It's a job, anyway, and I don't hate it, which is good. Not much else to report. 4th of July is soon. That should be fun. Usually is.

More later, I guess.


Wednesday, June 1, 2011

Sunday, May 29, 2011

Thoughs Upon Returning From London

I wish I could have had just a few more days. It’s not often that I wish for the impossible, but if only I could have had a bit more time. I’m not the same person I was two weeks ago. London changed me. Never have I adjusted so well to a new place. My entire life has been riddled with nostalgia and a yearning for the past. Until now. Not once was I homesick, not for an instant. I’d miss people, and things, but I never felt the same way as I had in the past. London took me in and made me a part of itself, and I took it in and made it a part of myself. In all my travels (which I will admit have been limited) I have never seen a place to which I took with such ease as I did to London.

This trip has also been the culmination of my personal Harry Potter saga. After the accident that killed my grandma and cousin, I stayed in St. George for two weeks. It was the first time I’d ever been away from home, and nine-year-old me was just as prone to homesickness as twenty-year-old me tends to be, and I had nothing to do but read. Her brother had the three published Harry Potter books, and I spent two weeks immersed in the world of Harry Potter. I was one of the lucky ones, the “Potter generation,” who got to experience Harry’s adolescence and maturation in time with our own. It didn’t match up perfectly, as it took Harry ten years to age seven, but it matched up fairly well most of the time.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows was published the summer before my final year of high school, and this summer the final film will come out. In August I will begin my final year of college. This trip was the capstone, the icing on the proverbial cake. It has been a new and renewing experience. It felt as though I was experiencing the series again for the first time. I find it very fitting that, just as Deathly Hallows mirrored Sorcerer’s Stone, this trip mirrors that during which I first discovered Harry Potter. Again, I have spent two weeks the farthest away from home I have ever been, and again I have had my life changed.

The Harry Potter story unfolded over a few overlapping decades: Sorcerer’s Stone was published in 1997, and Deathly Hallows in 2007; the Sorcerer’s Stone film was released in 2001, and the final Deathly Hallows film will be released this summer, 2011; and mine, from when I was ten to when I was twenty. At the end of this summer I will turn twenty-one, and my personal “Decade of Harry Potter” will be over. But decades end all the time, and I’m sure I will find something else to celebrate when this one ends.

Friday, April 29, 2011

Why I support Severus Snape:

Dumbledore would have been hard-pressed to find a spy as good as Snape. He's a brilliant wizard, able to fool even Voldemort with his Occlumency. Nobody else could have done that, and having such a good spy was extremely helpful to the Order.
Snape helped Harry and co. defeat Voldemort. He couldn't outright help them, but he sent the sword so they could destroy Horcruxes.
Snape was Dumbledore's most trusted confidant. They had it planned so that the Elder Wand would never have another owner. Granted, it didn't work out exactly according to their plan, but it still worked out because Harry gave it back to Dumbeldore's tomb in the end.
Last but not least:
Without Snape, Voldemort would never have heard the prophecy. If Voldemort hadn't heard the prophecy, he wouldn't have "marked Harry as his equal" and "given him the tools" he needed to defeat him. If Voldemort had not marked Harry for this destiny, Voldemort would have risen to power unchallenged. Also, because Snape loved Lily, she was given the choice to live. As we all know, she chose to die, giving Harry the protection he would need to keep himself safe from Voldemort.

Yes, Snape is still a jerk, but can you blame him? You can't say "He may not have ended up with Lily" when every other Hogwarts couple we know (Ron/Hermione, Harry/Ginny, James/Lily, Arthur/Molly) ended up together. He looked at Harry every day and saw what he could never have. Plus he's forced to lie at every turn, to go among Death Eaters when he hates them so much. He has to live his life in darkness so that he can bring about the downfall of the Dark Lord. In the words of Don Quixote (in the musical version): "To be willing to march into hell for a heavenly cause." If that's not admirable, I don't know what is.

Monday, April 18, 2011

"Now that it's over...

...I don't know what to do with the rest of my life." --Inigo Montoya

Two all-nighters, 3 printed manuscripts, 86 pages, and 24,573 words later, I have finished the first draft of the Our Story novella.

I never thought I would say this, but I'm sorry to see it end. Maybe because I never actually believed I would finish it.... Who knows.

But I'm really wondering what to do with the rest of my time. I suppose I do have several essays that need writing, and some of them are pretty long... Well, I say "pretty long," but I've just written 86 pages.

Maybe I'll catch up on sleep with all of this extra time...

Marathon Sessions

Aside from sleeping and being awake,

what is the longest consecutive amount of time you've spent doing one thing?

What was it?

Well, I've just spent 5 hours revising my novella. If anyone's interested, those 5 hours have been from midnight to 5 in the morning.

On Thursday, I wrote my novella from 7 pm to 5 am the next day, so there's a
10 hour session (holy crap!)

I read Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows in 9 hours straight when it first came out...

I went on an 18 mile hike once from about 1 am to 2 or 3 pm, so there's 13 or so hours spent hiking...

Evidiently, I'm crazy.

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Audience Expectation: Just Another Factor in the Adaptation Process

In biological terms, the word adaptation signifies the process of change that animals or plants undergo in order to better function in their environment. The adaptation of a book into a film is quite similar: the book must undergo some changes in order to work as a film. Generally, when speaking of a book-to-film adaptation, people refer to changes made only from a “fidelity” standpoint, ignoring the other reasons that filmmakers may have for changing details, or even entire plotlines. This concept, that there is more than just fidelity to the source text involved in adaptation, is also applicable to “remakes” of old films into new films. Kate Newell, in her article “’We’re Off to See the Wizard’ (Again),” says, “the governing question here is not ‘is this adaptation faithful?’ but ‘to what is this adaptation faithful?’” (Adaptation Studies 80, italics added). In the case of Alice in Wonderland, the Walt Disney production company has made two films. Each is different from the other, and both are different from the original novel by Lewis Carroll, because of the reputation and rules that the Disney company had set up for itself at the time of each film’s release.

In 1951, when Disney released Alice in Wonderland as an animated feature film, they had already been making films for fourteen years and had already established “rules” that viewers expected them to follow. Most Disney films up to that point contained musical numbers, and sometimes many (or all) of the characters were either anthropomorphic animals or objects. Since Carroll’s Alice already included anthropomorphic animals, the filmmakers were easily able to take that aspect of the story and use it in the film. However, to keep up with what viewers would be expecting, they also had to create a musical soundtrack for the film that would involve various characters singing. Also, Disney movies are quite simple (some may argue they are deceptively simple, but that’s too much to get into at the moment). When considering Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland and its sequel Through the Looking-glass, most readers tend to see Wonderland as a more simple narrative, while Looking-glass is fairly complex. Disney, in order to keep the simplicity that their viewers were accustomed to in the 1950s, took many of the characters, such as Tweedledum and Tweedledee and garden of living flowers, from the Looking-glass narrative and put them into the Wonderland plot, which would be much easier for children, who were the primary Disney viewers at the time, to understand. Also, to make the plot simpler still, the Disney screenwriters made it extremely obvious that Alice was dreaming the experience, even going so far as to have Alice see herself sleeping, so as not to mislead any viewer into thinking that Wonderland is a real place.

When Disney released another Alice in Wonderland in March of 2010, directed by Tim Burton, most viewers expected it to be a live-action remake of the original cartoon. By this point, nearly sixty years after the first Alice film, Disney had developed quite another set of standards. Their previous live action films, such as Narnia, Pirates of the Caribbean, and National Treasure, had all been adventure-based, with many action sequences. Alice was changed to reflect this cinematic trend: instead of merely mentioning the Jabberwock, as in Through the Looking-glass, Alice is actually destined to defeat it herself, and she is beset by the Bandersnatch and the Jub-jub bird (referencing the original Jabberwocky poem by Carrol) as she tries to complete this quest. These elements make for exciting cinematic action in the form of chase scenes, and an epic battle with the Jabberwock at the climax of the film. Also, the Disney characters, while once occasionally children, as in the case of Peter Pan, Pinocchio, and Alice, are now nearly always at least in their late teens or early twenties, especially in Disney’s live action films: Elizabeth Swann, in Pirates of the Caribbean is eighteen years old, and Benjamin Gates in National Treasure is at least in his mid-twenties. In the original Alice book, and the movie as well, Alice is seven years old. In the Burton film, she is nearly twenty, and is getting ready to be married. In addition to making changes because the era of Disney has changed, the Alice story was bound to change in some very distinct ways when Tim Burton signed on as the director. Burton is known for making his films slightly twisted. An audience attending a Burton film expects to see four main things: Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham-Carter, a score by Danny Elfman, and some sort of black-and-white striped costume. All of these things were included without much stretching of the Alice story, though they did change it somewhat, as the costumes and characterizations are a bit more modern and Burton-ish than Carrol’s originals.

Repeatedly in her article, Newell says that it is the “spirit” of the source text that must be captured, because this “can transcend its form and be transferred faithfully to another form” (79), and that different retellings of the story often change things “without ever losing the central meaning of the classic story” (89). Disney’s two adaptations of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland do just that. The story of Alice’s coming-of-age is still there, and although the nonsense and fantasy of Wonderland are different for each film, they still remain an integral part of the story. The Disney filmmakers, both in 1951 and 2010, were as faithful as they could be to the source text while still complying with the audience’s wishes and expectations.

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

Weirdest poem I've ever written...

This process was extremely detailed and very confusing, but you've got to know it.

First, Dr. Dubrasky said to visualize ourselves getting into a car, and driving to our favorite place. Then she told us to write down 15 nouns, 15 action verbs, and 15 adjectives/adverbs that were in or described the place we visualized. Then she told us to make 3 categories: blue, black, and brown. We had to put 5 nouns, 5 verbs, and 5 adjectives in each category. Then we had to pick one word that described that category. THEN we had to pick one more word that described the three describing words. That final word was to be the title of our poem, and we had to use one category for one stanza, adding words if necessary. So here's my poem:


PINPRICK

The children playing, splashing

Bright blue sky onto the cool driveway,

The wind blowing, sending yellow shadows flying

Onto the shining green grass

Near the hedge entwined with wisteria.


The fence is waiting,

Humming with electricity,

Guarding against the mountains beyond.

The family in the house behind the pergola is laughing,

Stupid little chirping laughs,

Like the birds in the red tree.

But the silence and calm of the mountains is so alluring,

And the golden sunlight is warm on my skin,

So I’ll be patient.


The sharp smell of weed killer permeates the air,

And I can hear the small sound of gnats buzzing above the kiddie pool,

Creating a discordant harmony with the lazy chirping of the crickets I can see in the

grass.

The pool water is still, and all is quiet,

Sitting in the sun, talking with my brother on a warm summer day.

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Melted

Grandpa,
Was it hot, that day you walked
To the Meadow Gold Dairy for a field trip?
Was it sunny?
The red sign on the wall would have reflected the sun.
Did it shine in your eyes?
Was the inside cool and clean?
At the end of the day, when they gave you
The Fudgesicle,
Did all your friends rip off the wrappers
And stuff them in their mouths?
Did you take the wrapper off too?
Is that why, as you carried yourself home on your crutches,
Your fudgesicle melted along the way?
Is that why there was nothing left when you got back
But a chocolate-stained popsicle stick?

Monday, February 21, 2011

Yes, Infidelity is Ethical

Until I took Dr. Bishop's class in film adaptation, I did not understand that, since movie audiences must expect different things from movies than from books, book-to-movie adaptations do not necessarily need to be completely faithful to the source text. Thomas Leitch illustrated this concept most eloquently in his essay “The Ethics of Infidelity,” which is included in the Adaptation Studies anthology. He said, “If the audience in question has already read the novel … on which the film is based, surely they expect a different experience; otherwise, they would not be watching the movie at all” (63). When I watched The Curious Case of Benjamin Button after having read the short story by F. Scott Fitzgerald, I realized that this idea Leitch has posed is not only very logical, but it is extremely applicable to the adaptation in question. After reading Leitch’s essay, it was obvious to me that the film version of Benjamin Button had no business being identical to the book, because, not only was it simply not a necessity, but also because the odds were high that not many people would notice the differences, and the producers were under no contract to be completely faithful anyway.

When the Benjamin Button film was released in late 2008, not many people had read the original short story, or even the graphic novel that was published in 2007. This is one of the reasons that the filmmakers did not need to worry about fidelity to the source text: because “absent [an audience that is familiar with the source text], it’s hard to see why filmmakers shouldn’t feel free to do whatever they like with their source material” (Leitch 64). Such was the case when Benjamin Button was released, and such is the case now, more than two years later. After talking with fellow students, I realized that none of them had ever heard of the short story, although they had all either heard of or seen the film. If this is the case with most movie-goers, then the filmmakers must have had the same idea that Leitch poses here, because they were hardly faithful to the original text.

Likewise, Leitch also says, concerning the “fidelity” of an adaptation, it is only greatly necessary “when fidelity is likely to be a selling point in order to presell a particular adaptation by association with [an already] commercially successful property” (64). This was obviously not an issue for the creators of the Benjamin Button film, as they were not very faithful to the original text. They kept the premise of a man aging backwards, but changed the mythology of even that. In the original story, Benjamin ages backwards mentally as well as physically. When the reader first sees him, he is described as “an old man apparently about seventy years of age. His sparse hair was almost white, and from his chin dripped a long smoke-coloured beard” (Fitzgerald). Here, he is a full-sized grown man who also has the ability to think and speak for himself. In contrast, baby Benjamin in the film is accurately newborn-sized, but afflicted with the appearance and complications of old age, and ages forward mentally, but physically he ages both forward and backward, growing to a full-size man, and then shrinking as his body de-ages to a child. Had the filmmakers been more concerned with fidelity, they would not have overlooked this first and most crucial element to the story, as it is what gives the story its flavor.

The last, and possibly the most crucial, point that I would like to address is the fact that “filmmakers who purchase adaptation rights to particular properties are purchasing, for example, the right to change specific elements in those properties” (Leitch 67, italics added). The truth of this statement should be obvious, but I would like to illuminate it by providing a rather all-inclusive example from the Benjamin Button story. In the original, Benjamin is born as a full-sized old man, which adds a bit of comedy to the story, especially in the beginning when his father buys him a rattle and insists “that he should ‘play with it,’ whereupon the old man took it with--a weary expression and could be heard jingling it obediently at intervals throughout the day” (Fitzgerald). In the film, however, Benjamin is born with an old version of a newborn baby’s body and abandoned by his father, which is not funny on any level. Abandonment is, of course, tragic, and the sight of a wrinkly, old baby is rather pathetic. It seems that the filmmakers were choosing to make the story more of a dramatic tragedy and less a comedy, and they had every right to do just that. They bought the right to do so when they bought the rights to the film.

When they changed the experience of the Benjamin Button story from a comic/tragedy to a dramatic, but ultimately tragic, story, the filmmakers were entirely in their rights. They had purchased the literal right to do so. Also, the fidelity of the story was not the reason for the adaptation, so it was not necessary. Since the film version of Benjamin Button was undoubtedly successful, winning three Academy Awards and grossing more than three hundred million dollars worldwide, it is clear that the infidelity of the filmmakers was warranted and “ethical,” just as Thomas Leitch says that infidelity can be.

Sunday, February 6, 2011

Looking...


I used to complain about feeling like just a pair of eyes.

I hated feeling like I was just watching stuff happen, not doing anything of my own, just watching other people's lives happen while mine seemed to be on standby.

(of course, that was last summer, but that's neither here nor there)

But I realized today that actually, being a pair of eyes is pretty enlightening. When you look for it, there's actually a lot going on.
Sometimes people think that we can't see what's up, and maybe that's true for some people.
But I've been using my eyes a long time, and I know what I see when I see it.
Of course, this does lead to trouble on occasion, as I have been known to make comments and things that OTHER people don't understand because they don't use their eyes.
Which is actually kind of funny, now that I think about it.

Aaaaannnd now I'm rambling. What?

Thursday, February 3, 2011

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

The House I Couldn't Grow Up In

I was not born in this house. I never lived here. This was my grandmother’s house in Napa, California. There is so much I could tell, because the family lived there for many years before I ever came along. But I suppose my story begins on June 23, 1990. Funnily enough, it ends almost exactly ten years and six months later.

That was the day that my parents were married in the front yard. The driveway came straight up out of the end of the road, and the house was backwards on it. The driveway led to the garage, which was in the back of the house of course. Then, in order to reach the front door, you had to walk around the house. The front lawn was long and round, dotted with a half dozen tall, sprawling oak trees. My parents were married there, on that wide brick front porch where my aunt and I would eat dry ramen and dance to “New Age Girl” four years later. On the long front lawn, I would run through the sprinklers with my best friend Trevor, whose mom Debbie taught me how to wink. At age ten, I would lose my “family ring” in the longer grass that the lawnmower couldn’t reach, just at the base of one of the towering oak trees. In the tallest tree there was a rope swing. There was a ladder up the back, but I would never be big enough to climb the ladder and swing from it until the house was long sold. Past the lawn was the barn where my father and his brothers would build a haunted house every Halloween, and it would house baby Jesus in the live nativity every Christmas. Last I heard, the current owners still do the haunted house. I must admit that I’m proud of them for holding up a Sorensen tradition, though they may never know what it means to us, and the people in the neighborhood we left behind. My grandma’s horse was named Mariah, after the wind, and she lived in the corral attached to the front end of the barn. There was one morning that my uncle Micah came in and announced that he had just been riding Mariah bareback, to which my grandma replied, “Were you bareback or was she?”

We had been standing in the kitchen, ranged around the long wood-topped island. We were probably eating crepes without plates, rolled up like burritos in the true Sorensen style. I think it had to do with the fact that, with eleven kids (not counting spouses or grandchildren or random “strangers within the gates”), there were simply never enough plates to go around. My grandma always made crepes, never pancakes. I think it was because they had a dozen or so chickens and needed something to do with the eggs. There was a burn mark on the island from a hot pan that had been set down without a pad, and something tells me that the cabinet below the burn mark was the cabinet from which my first sister pulled a jar of honey and spilled it all over the floor. It was on the island that I sat when I was about four and my mom corrected my lisp. It was in that kitchen that I learned to say “excuse me” when I wanted attention, and it was in that kitchen that my uncle, Micah again, made me choke on a Slurpee when I was five. The house rang with music, always, from one of the two grand pianos that my grandpa kept in the front room. My aunts used to sing when he played, their voices lusty and rich. I wish to this day that I could sing like them.

When I was ten years old, my grandmother died in a freak accident up Provo canyon. It was June 5, 2000. Within a year, the family was gone from the house. My aunt Jennifer was married in December of 2000, and we all came out to California to take our last vacation there. We had her wedding and the live nativity in a matter of days, and that was it. In those last few days, nothing had changed. Everything was as it had always been. The lawn was still long and green and lush. There was still a twisted pipe protruding from the ground where a house had stood before my dad burned it down – by accident, I’m told. We strung the back patio with Christmas lights for my aunt’s wedding reception dance, and my cousins and I spent the night arguing about whose dresses were actually burgundy. That night, the five of us slept on the landing at the top of the stairs. To this day, I am still curious as to how we all managed to fit up there. None of us slept much that night. I think we wanted to spend as much conscious, waking time as we could in the house. We all knew it would be the last time.

For ten more years, it was the last time. Some of the Sorensen siblings, my dad included, took several trips to California after my grandmother’s death, to visit friends and such. But I never went back. It wasn’t until this past August, August 2011, that my whole family went back. We had to visit The House, of course. At first glance, everything looked the same. The ground was still covered in a layer of oak leaves and acorns; the lawn was still, incredibly, as long as I remember. But then I noticed the dandelions, and that the rope swing had broken but no one had bothered to replace it or take it down. The grass in the field behind the barn was long and dead, and had obviously remained untouched for a long time. But it wasn’t until we came around the back that we noticed the changes. They’d built an outdoor kitchen, and added a pool, and plowed up the field where my parent’s engagement photos were taken to plant a vineyard. I’m not sure what I expected to see there. I think I expected to go back and just be transported back to my childhood, because that’s all I had at that house.

I don’t think I’ll be going back if I can possibly help it. Too much has changed. The house is not the Neverland it was when I was a kid, and I would rather it stay that way in my mind than be tainted with the reality of the remodels and renovations that it has undergone in the last decade. My grandma’s spirit doesn’t live in this new house. I thought that she would still be there, but too much has changed, and there’s really no point in going back without her. It’s just not the same.