1) I am not an event photographer.
For a long time I believed that if I were present at an event, and taking pictures constantly throughout that event, that afterwards I would have a collection of meaningful, memorable photographs that I could share with others to give them the thrilling feeling that they had actually been there.
Wrongo!
While I was pretty good during high school and college at documenting the shenanigans my friends and I engaged in, being skilled at ordering subjects to smile and hold up their beers while two of them mock arm wrestle on a dorm bed does not make you the equivalent of an event photographer, no matter how much of that moment you may have captured. Face it: It was not a complicated moment.
My most recent reminder of this fact was during a family reunion I attended over the summer. Being the sensitive, thoughtful photographer I am, I neglected to even pack a camera for the trip, so instead I spent one desperate evening sprinting around during a backyard barbeque, stiff-armed, pointing my cell phone at family members like a fencing sword while telling them to ‘hold it for a second’ as they innocently tried to converse with people they didn’t get to see very often while eating ribs (which is hard enough to do in itself).
The resulting pictures are about what you’d expect. People look confused, annoyed; they are blurry and indistinct walking in or out of the frame. Some have their mouths open in mid-sentence (the sentence was probably something along the lines of ‘oh, no’ or ‘what are you—?’). I got a couple of good snapshots of the younger kids mugging for the camera, their cheeks painted with sticky rib sauce. But little kids are notoriously good at going with the flow where cameras are concerned, having not yet discovered their self-loathing or their bad sides. They also instinctively understand that when someone is pointing a cell phone at them, it is to take a picture; a fact which is not always obvious to older generations.
98% of the pictures I ended up with are useless, which is too bad, since I also went around telling everyone “as soon as I get home, I’ll send you copies of these!” Hopefully they have since forgotten both that statement and my behavior.
Thank goodness I had the presence of mind to engage the services of an actual event photographer at my wedding, rather than just sticking a camera into the unwilling hands of several of the guests as I had originally planned. I now realize what an unfortunate disaster that would have been. Demanding anything of your wedding guests other than that they have a good time and eat and drink a lot is really not appropriate.
There are some jobs that you can do yourself, but there are also valid reasons that certain professional fields exist: because most of us are bad at doing those things and should hire someone who knows what they are doing if we want good results. It’s time I better learned to differentiate between the two. Who knows, maybe someday I’ll even stop cutting my own hair!
Democrats: Hey, we’re about to drive off a cliff, so let’s just turn this car to the left to stay on the road.
Republicans: Wait a minute. Not only are we about to drive off a cliff, but this car is also feeling extremely cold! Turn down the air conditioning right this minute!
Tea Party Republicans: That’s right! Turning off the A/C is the most important thing to do right now! We have been irresponsible for far too long, keeping temperatures in this car at much lower levels than is reasonable, given our gas mileage and the price of oil! It’s going to get warmer if we turn the A/C down, but we’re all going to have to make some sacrifices here!
Democrats: Wait a minute. Yes, the A/C is on pretty high. But it’s extremely hot out, and lots of people depend on that A/C right now. Turning it down is going to affect some passengers a lot more than others. Maybe the people in the front of the car, who are much closer to the cold air, could trade places with those in the back and give some other people the chance to cool off?
Tea Party Republicans: The people in front have earned the right to be in front! We are not turning this car around until you promise that the people in the front can stay where they are.
Democrats: Turn the car around! Just turn the car around! Why are we even debating this?
Tea Party Republicans: I don’t know why you’re so concerned about that cliff. There is no proof that driving off a cliff can kill you. You are just trying to scare everyone.
Democrats: The only way you’ll help us turn this car around is if we turn down the A/C and everyone stays where they are?
Tea Party Republicans: Damn skippy.
Democrats: I have half a mind to just let us drive off this cliff.
Republicans: Are you saying you’d rather we all die than turn down your precious A/C? Don’t you care about anyone in this car?!
Democrats: Fine. We’ll turn off the A/C and everyone can stay put. Most of the passengers in this car are not going to like that, but I guess it’s the only way we can get you to hit the brakes.
Tea Party Republicans: Fine. But I still say it’s much too cold in here.
Car: Squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeal.
American People: You all suck.
You would imagine that having a forty-five minute commute twice each day would have driven my ears into the arms of books on tape* long ago. But instead, for over two years, I endured that long drive each day with only NPR and a handful of various other radio stations (one classic Rock, several Top 40, one R&B and a delightfully obscure and indie-flavored college station to be exact) for company.
I am embarrassed to say this, but my excuse for not venturing into audio book territory was pretty sad. “I’m a very fast reader,” I actually thought to myself, a tad smugly. “Listening to someone tell me a story is going to frustrate me to no end. I’d rather just read books and listen to music.”
Man, was I full of it. I had no idea what I was missing out on. I’m so glad I didn’t wait any longer than this to find out.
The first book I listened to, several months ago, had been a Christmas gift from Mom, a giant, 14-CD tome entitled, “The Memory of Running”, by Ron McLarty. What drew me to it was the fact that the author was narrating his own book. This gave it some sort of extra authenticity, I thought. But not only that—the story was gripping, the characters were interesting, and best of all, I was reading while I was driving! I was actually accomplishing something while in my car, other than getting to and from work, which is not that big an accomplishment by itself, as it is more or less expected of me every day anyway!
I was still not sure this audio book thing was for me. But I went to the library and got another one. This time it was “Diary”, by Chuck Palahniuk, an author I had always been meaning to read. The narrator was different too, and I wasn’t sure I’d like that, either, since I was so used to my first narrator. But guess what, I did! I loved it!
So, recklessly, I checked out a third, and a fourth, and a fifth book, each of which I got through in a week or two, thanks to my long drive. Each time I listened, enthralled, to a new story, I thought, ‘There is a very specific reason I like this as an audiobook. It’s because it’s about writing, or it’s because it’s about New York City, or it’s because it reminds me of a particular time in my life.’ But really, I think I just liked them because I like books!
Right now I’m listening to a book that’s narrated by George Guidall, whose narrations I’m quickly becoming a huge fan of. He is somehow able to convey the distinct voices of the various characters perfectly—and even though he is an older man, and speaks in a slight falsetto when he reads the dialogue of a female character, he does so without sounding the least bit ridiculous. I don’t know how he does it, but he’s that good—and as a result, he appears to work a lot in the audio book business. So far, he’s narrated three of the books I’ve listened to. I like finding narrators whose readings I enjoy—and it’s particularly nice when they’ve recorded a lot of titles. When you like the book, and you like the narrator, there’s a nice little synchrony that goes on.
So, in conclusion, books on tape* are great! If you drive a lot, and you’ve been thinking about giving them a try, I wholeheartedly recommend it. Especially because you can generally get them free at the library, and I’m cheap. I now visit the library every two weeks like clockwork. It’s a ritual I very much enjoy.
Below are a list of the audio books I’ve listened to and loved so far:
The Memory of Running, by Ron McLarty, read by same. Fun, engaging story, great narrator.
Inherent Vice, by Thomas Pynchon, read by Ron McLarty. While I like Pynchon’s colorful use of language, it’s sometimes hard for me to follow on the page. I feel like this would have been a hard slog to get through on paper. Plus it was a detective novel, and I am a complete flake when it comes to following mystery plot-lines. As it was, I was able to drift in and out of the storyline as I listened and let the language wash over me, which was delightful.
Diary, by Chuck Palahniuk, read by Martha Plimpton. I love books about small, creepy seaside towns and crazy artists and the artistic process. As a result, this one was right up my alley.
The Jungle, by Upton Sinclair, read by George Guidall. This was a great story, but really depressing. I’d still like to finish it, but I may have lost my momentum. Damn whoever requested it while I had it, which meant that I had to give it back to the Garner Public Library before I finished it! Also, who on earth requests the audio book version of Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle”?
The Accidental Tourist, by Anne Tyler, read by George Guidall. This book was FANTASTIC. And the experience of listening to it was wonderful. I never thought I would be excited to get in my car and commute until I started listening to audio books.
Exit Ghost, by Philip Roth, read by George Guidall. Another excellent read. I can’t believe I’d never read Philip Roth before. Now that I’ve discovered him I keep wanting to say to people, “You know who’s a great author? This guy named Philip Roth!” This is probably unnecessary though.
*Yes, I know, they’re not on tape any more, they’re on CD. So shoot me.
Akie and I discussed our burgeoning lawsuit against Kim Kardashian in today’s issue of the Perpetual Post. My side is below, you can find his here!
MOLLY SCHOEMANN: I am concerned about the precedent set by the historic Female Employees vs. Walmart lawsuit, which was recently thrown out of court for being too big to move forward. You see, that lawsuit was but a fraction of the size of the countersuit that I am currently assembling: Pretty Much All of Us vs. Kim Kardashian.
To give you a little background, which you probably don’t need but wish you did: Kardashian is suing an actress who recently appeared in an Old Navy commercial because she believes the actress resembles her and is thus damaging her public image. I’ve watched the commercial and honestly, the actress does look a bit like Kim Kardashian—but nobody would ever confuse the two of them for more than a few seconds. And the resemblance is mostly because the actress is a dark-haired, dark-eyed, spoiled-looking girl in a tacky outfit. Perhaps the problem is that Kim Kardashian saw herself in the actress, didn’t like what she saw, and, rather than engaging in some deep self-reflection to confront the problem, she indulged in the Hollywood alternative to soul-searching: hiring a lawyer.
Now, I could argue that Kardashian’s public image has nowhere to go but up. I could also argue that the actress being sued has every right to sue Kardashian right back for implying a resemblance between the two of them, which has potentially derailed any chance she has at ever being taken seriously or liked. But instead, I’m gathering together a number of plaintiffs across the country (essentially the entire country) and we’re going to sue Kim Kardashian for existing—since by doing so she is causing every single one of us irreparable pain and suffering.
Think about it. How many times have you been forced to confront the terrifyingly nightmarish fact of Kim Kardashian? Against your will, even? How many magazine covers have thrown her overexposed visage into your unwilling gaze? How many websites have written exhaustively about her many uninteresting relationships and her many untalented siblings and their uninteresting relationships? How many evenings have you channel-surfed past one of her terrible reality shows and shuddered reflexively at being forced to acknowledge that the world contains her? How will you ever get those precious moments of your life back? Who will restore your damaged memories and soothe your troubled soul?
Kim, we’re out for blood. And there’s not a jury in the world that won’t order you to pay out an enormous settlement to every single one of us. The only problem is going to be recruiting jurors who aren’t already part of my lawsuit. Come to think of it, that might be impossible. You win this round, Kim Kardashian. And all of us continue to lose.
I would like to share with you, in case you missed it, my discussion from over at the Perpetual Post of how many more days off a year the Senate has than we do. I think it’s even more apropos right now.
MOLLY SCHOEMANN: When our Senators, their upper lips trembling and brows sweating in sheer amazement at the brute strength of their own astounding willpower, conceded that instead of taking a week off for the July Fourth holiday, they would instead stay in Washington and continue to prop up our failing budget, it gave me pause.
They get a whole week off? For the Fourth of July holiday? I’m not positive about this, but I’m pretty certain that most of us got just one day off. The fourth day of July, to be exact. And that’s if we are lucky— those of us who work in retail, food service or used car sales do not in fact generally have that day off, let alone the entire week. Maybe the Senate just needs the additional time to be extra patriotic?
I decided to investigate the matter further, went online and in a few minutes dug up the Senate’s tentative annual calendar, which is available in a handy .pdf form so that you can see just exactly how many days out of the year our Senators are not in session. It’s a lot of days! So many days, in fact, that I wondered why they were so sad to give up that week in July.
I suppose it IS the only entire week that they have off in July—although they DID just have an entire week off in June, and they DO have the entire month of August off. And the first week of September. Oh, and the last week of September. Also, most of January.
To make it easy for you, since I know you don’t have a lot of free time, unlike the Senate, I even did the math.
First off, of course there are 365 days in a year. Assuming that weekends count for approximately 104 days a year, if you subtract those, that leaves 261 working days in a year. Let’s also be generous and subtract 1 holiday a month, average, (although not many jobs give you 1 holiday off a month) leaving 249 days a year.
Going by their online calendar, the Senate is in session for 192 days a year. Subtract that from 249 available working days: that leaves 57 working days a year when the Senate is not in session.
“But Molly,” you’re thinking. “Senators have plenty of other things that they have to be doing when they’re not actually in session. They are probably using those other days to meet with constituents and do other Senatorey things that they can’t do while they are in session.”
To that I say, Sure! Certainly Senators need some time to schedule in travel for in-person meetings and to do other work. But really, don’t you think that with the advent of the telephone, email, video conferencing and other marvels of modern technology which have given many workers across the globe the ability to telecommute and to work excruciatingly demanding hours—wouldn’t some of those conveniences apply to our Senate? Couldn’t they be used to shave off some of that required extra time? Do our Senators have to meet with their constituents in person? Do they really need that much time off?
Not only that, but I don’t think that a lot of those session-free weeks are intended to be working weeks—if they were, would five of them (five weeks!) be scheduled around a national holiday? This leads me to believe that those session-less weeks are not intended to be a time for our Senators to be having meetings and doing work, since they’re during a time when most working people schedule their vacations.
There are in fact only two months out of the year when our Senators do NOT have an entire week when they are not in session. But don’t worry, they have a long weekend in each of those months. I’m sure they really need it by then!
Your feed might look more like this:
[Bob]: I hope my ex-girlfriend notices that I am attending the Film Festivel “Nietzsche’s Influence: A Silent Retrospective”. When she dumped me last year she said I wasn’t ‘interested in ideas’. This will show her!
I will not actually attend this event.
[Mary]: I’ve come across an obscure three-second animated clip of a cat that appears to be using a tiny hula hoop, after aimlessly surfing the internet for five hours as I do most evenings. I have posted this clip on my Facebook wall as proof of my quirky, idiosyncratic existence. Please acknowledge it.
[Alan]: I would like it to be known that I am out drinking at a bar right now, so I have posted a dull comment about the beer I just ordered, while out at this bar, drinking. With my many friends.
[Louise]: Here is an amusing anecdote of something I just overheard at work. These days when something interesting happens to me, my first thought is usually, “I should put that on Facebook”.
[Charlotte]: You will notice that I have taken over 400 pictures of just myself, in various outfits and poses, and posted them on my Facebook profile, because I am attractive and my life is interesting to others.
[Barbara]: Is eating dinner alone at home and feeling lonely. Rather than reaching out to anyone, I have updated my Facebook status with a brief description of how much I am enjoying my dinner. Now I am waiting anxiously for comments and ‘likes’ on this post, which will temporararily ease and then ultimately worsen my feelings of isolation.
[Mike]: Here is a link to a well-written, thought-provoking opinion piece that I did not finish reading, with a brief comment urging everyone else to read the piece. In this way I have co-opted the author’s opinion as my own and avoided having to define how I actually feel on the subject, which is good because I really don’t know that much about it but would like to appear knowledgeable.
[Trey]: I have changed my profile picture. The caption reads, “This is How I Would Like to be Seen by You”. Every picture on my profile is carefully selected to reflect the image of me that I would like you to have. My life is a product that I advertise on Facebook.
[Lana]: I have shared another ironic photo or video on my Facebook wall for my friends to comment on the utter ridiculousness of! Isn’t it stupid, yet kind of amazing? What were they thinking?!
I’m not interested in sharing things I find genuinely interesting or moving, because this would reveal too much information about who I really am, which might make me vulnerable to direct criticism and would also open up the possibility that people might disagree with me, challenge me or engage with me in a meaningful way.
[William]: Please make me feel loved.
Yesterday after work I picked up the dog’s medication, dropped some books off at the library, then went back to our apartment we’re still moving out of to get our plants and bring them to the new house.
Oh, and I bought mouthwash.
I seem to have turned into the kind of person who would bore Mr. Rogers. When did this happen?
Was there a fork in the road a few years back that I ignored? Some missed opportunity; a pivotal moment in my life when I had the chance to become a roadie for KISS or to join an astronaut shuttle program, and I blew it?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m grateful for the life I have. But I sometimes wonder: In some parallel universe is there a wilder, more carefree version of me climbing Mount Everest or riding wild horses across the desert?
This week Dave Tomar, Matthew David Brozik and myself took on Netflix’s recent price hike in the Perpetual Post. My side is below. You can read the full piece here. Trust me, the fur flies!
MOLLY SCHOEMANN: Hey Netflix, don’t stream on my shoes and tell me it’s raining. Your new, higher, “a la carte” pricing for previously combined, low-cost services is just bad business.
You could have at least given your customers the courtesy of pretending as though you aren’t trying to wring every last cent out of them, the way cable and internet providers have been doing forever: Simply let your monthly pricing creep up gradually, month by month, year by year, so that I don’t even realize how much I’m actually spending until I’m taking out a second mortgage to pay for cable. It’s like giving me a soothing backrub as you steal my wallet. At least it shows you care enough to hide what you’re doing to me from me, instead of just hiking your prices right in my face and expecting me to smile wanly and fork over the extra cash.
And I don’t buy the argument that this new pricing is fair because the original price for these services was so cheap that we should just appreciate how great that was. You’re damn right, the original price was cheap, and I liked it that way! I like things that are cheap! And I don’t need a price hike to make me realize how cheap something formerly was. You know what really makes me appreciate the cheapness of something? Keeping it cheap! As an analogy, right at this moment, I also appreciate the fact that my big toe is not throbbing in terrible pain. Should I hit it with a hammer, then, so that I can remember even more clearly how great it felt before I did that?
Nor do I understand the logic that since the price hike is only $6-7 bucks a month for the average household, it’s not such a big deal. Sure, that’s not a large amount. But when I consider the fact my monthly bill of $9.99 is going to increase by about 60%, to $15.98, and for the exact same services I’ve been getting for $9.99, I feel very indignant. No, the extra $6 is not all that stands between me and starvation. I can afford it. But is that a valid defense? That most of your customers can afford the price hike? Most of my friends can afford to give me $5 a month for the exact same level of friendship I have been providing them for years for free. But is fair for me to ask for it?
And if this price hike is because the cost of streaming is higher than Netflix originally forecast, well maybe they should have done their homework on that when they were originally designing their pricing model. That’s part of their job; to price services in a way that is both profitable for the company, and reasonable for the customer. Now I’m supposed to pay an extra $70+ bucks a year because someone in accounting forgot to carry the one?
All over the internet, Netflix customers are muttering angrily that thanks to this price hike, they have canceled their accounts, or are strongly considering canceling them. And perhaps Netflix was even counting on this. Perhaps they did the cold hard math and realized that if 40% of their customers desert them over this astronomical price hike, they’ll still be making more money than they ever were before, thanks to the revenue brought in by said price hike. But the problem is, it’s not just about the money, and you would think Netflix would know this. A big part of staying in business relies on customer loyalty. For whatever reason, Netflix customers have long tended to be extremely loyal. Perhaps it’s Netflix’s legendary customer service or their keen ability to understand the utter depths of our laziness. Everything about using Netflix IS ridiculously laid-back and easy. And those little red envelopes are so cheerful. But there is only so far these things can go, in the face of such cruel pricing practices. And customer loyalty, so gradually attained, is extremely hard to win back after a gaffe like this.
Those customers who don’t desert Netflix in droves; the ones who hang on and swallow their pride and pay the increased pricing—they won’t have the same love in their hearts for Netflix anymore. They’ll stay, but they’ll be watching the horizon for the dawn of the Next Big Lazy Movie-Watcher Service Provider. And they probably won’t have to wait long. It feels like every time you turn around, there’s a new, even easier way to rent or stream TV shows and movies.
I’m convinced that this is going to be your ‘Let them eat cake’ moment, Netflix. You should have continued to offer cheaper cake.
When you helpfully remind me to lift with my legs, I will roll my eyes and yell at you to mind your own business, and then return to lifting diligently with my back.
I Heard Tell 