Running the Noveling Gauntlet!

My Dear Reader,

As of ten seconds ago, I have decided to keep my word and actually finish my second NaNoWriMo novel. It was kind of a hard decision to make, since I have less than seven days left to reach my goal of 50,000 words and I only have *gulp* 2,096 words right now.

Am I crazy, you ask? No, no I'm not. I'm eccentric, that's all. The difference is fairly simple: crazy people get locked up, and eccentric people win Newberry medals and have very entertaining personal lives.

It's probably going to be an awful novel. I have officially ceased to care. It's 50,000 or bust! So the posting might be a little crazy eccentric in the upcoming days (hence the early post), but rest assured that I am typing my fingers off. How I can do this and simultaneously find a job is uncertain, but I think that I'm about to find out.

If you have interpreted this post as a tight-lipped plea for help, you may not be far off of the mark. And while you can't write my novel for me, you can become an official follower of my blog (i.e. click the link to the right that says, "Follow this blog") so I can know that you care.

Regards, best wishes, and 47,904 to go,

-Cecily Jane

Oh, the Irony: Obama's Blackberry

My Dear Reader,

Okay, so I really thought that this blog would steer clear of politics after the election, but something came to my attention that was just too good to pass up. It turns out that upon being sworn in as the President of the United States, President-Elect Obama is going to have to give up his precious Blackberry and e-mail accounts. A trivial matter, you say? Not to the newsmedia, it's not.

Check out this outrage that Lester Holt* (of NBC's Nightly News) has expressed on the subject. (Fast forward to 2:10 in to get right to it):

Can you feel the seething rage? I had to watch a couple of episodes of Sesame Street just to recover. Mr. Holt is just as upset as all Americans should be on the matter, though perhaps slightly more concerned than I would recommend. He and Savannah Guthrie are not the only ones in arms, however. All of the news is up in arms over this latest development as you can see here** and here. Even Fox has weighed in on the matter, as you can see here. With chilling accuracy, these reporters have tried to explain to us the painful, Blackberry-less future that Obama is facing come January, and you can't help but feel their overwhelming sympathy for him. It's so nice that they care.

But to be serious here: this is a stupid issue. What else do we need to know about our president and future president? Their top ten sitcoms of all time? Which leg they put in first when they're putting on their pants? What puppy they are planning to adopt? Never mind.

So why, then, would so much attention be spent on the issue? I had to think about that one for a second, until I realized that these journalists, despite their medium of choice, all have one trivial thing in common: they all use Blackberrys themselves. And if they all happen to be just as addicted as Obama is supposed to be, then it's easy to see how they would think that this is an issue that everyone actually cares about. Kind of like how the majority of those same journalists were so in the tank for Obama that they thought that we wanted to know just how much they loved him. And oh, did we know.

And here's the irony: Remember how Senator McCain was so harshly criticized for not knowing how to e-mail? Remember how people tried to make you believe that it mattered if a presidential candidate could e-mail or not? HA! Who's laughing now? (The answer: Cecily. Cecily is laughing.) So this begs the question: if the presidency means no Blackberry, and if a Blackberry is so important to a person like Obama, should Obama step down as president-elect and let someone who can handle going four years without e-mail take the job?

Regards, best wishes, and a bias-free media,

-Cecily Jane

P.S. Just to be clear, that sentence about Obama stepping down is a joke.

*By the way, as my claim to fame, my Madre went to high school with Lester Holt. It's true!

**And I have to say that me favorite headline of the day was the one from the New York Times article: "Lose the BlackBerry? Yes He Can, Maybe ." So clear. So concise. So bold. That's why this newspaper is the king of all American newsmedia, you know. You must henceforth address it as "Your Majesty." Kissing the feet is also appropriate.

UPDATE: Here's another video on the subject (fast forward to 1:46):

Interview Confusion

My Dear Reader,

The post-graduation job hunt is not going very well! I've been pulling my hair out for the past few weeks and months, but I got my first interview yesterday for a glass/window place. It was great just to have an interview--after sending in so many resumes, and after searching through so many job listings. Of course, the job was going to be an hour away, so it was a long shot, but interview experience is worth the trouble.

When I got there, however, it was a little different of an experience than I had anticipated. The interviewer looked through my resume and immediately told me that I should try to work at a bookstore. Odd, I thought, that he had given up on me so quickly, and then something came out of his mouth that I never expected.

"So I see that you got your graduate degree* at BYU, so it seems that it would be obvious--or maybe not so obvious--that you're LDS," he said. I nodded. "So you have your sabbath on Friday night and Saturday . . ." he continued.

WHAT? What the what? "No," I said, "I think that you're confusing me with Seventh Day Adventists or Jews. My sabbath is Sunday." He backed down quickly, and I was grateful that I didn't get caught up in a "Yes, you do" "No, I don't" belief-battle as I have been in many a time before. Still, it was a weird interview. He ended up offering me a job as a door-to-door window salesperson, which wasn't what I applied for. I thought back to the month I spent as a struggling telemarketer (i.e. soul-seller), and I decided that I'm going to have to turn the job down.

At least I got a story out of it, right? Feel free to post your own weird interview or belief misunderstanding story below!

Regards, best wishes, and employment,

-Cecily Jane

*I don't know why he got the impression that I have a graduate degree, and he didn't seem to understand me when I tried to tell him that I have a bachelor's, he kept going on about this graduate degree that I don't have.

On President-Elect Obama

My Dear Reader,

Today, the citizens of the United States of America, exercising the power given to them by the Constitution, elected Senator Barack Obama to be their 44th president. Since Barack Obama is a man of African descent, this is a remarkable turning point in the history of our nation, and I cannot help but be proud of my nation for it.

Sure, he wasn't the guy I voted for. He and I share some fundamental ideological differences, and he had less experience under his belt than any president in years. He also has yet to prove himself to the world, but he has captured the hearts of a nation, and I commend him for that. And I can admit that a President Obama can offer Americans two things that they desperately need: confidence in their President and respect from the nations of the world. This post is not a conservative turning tail; it is an American facing the facts and the future. When you believe in the system, and the system overrules you, you can still believe in and support that system.

I still stand by decision, and no matter what anybody says, I still believe in Senator John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin. Yet, even as I'm typing this, I'm trying to figure out how I'm going to explain this to my children-to-be, that I voted against the first black president. I suppose that I have a while until I figure it out.

In the meantime, I realize that Barack Obama has a sea of expectations to fill. He's been called a "Messiah," and if you will recall, the last Messiah we had rose people from the dead and atoned for the sins of every person who was, is, or will be. Sure, Mr. Obama is supposed to be a political Messiah only, but that kind of rhetoric means that this next president has even more challenges to face than John McCain would have had. This means that if he doesn't part the waters for the American people, he's going to be in a bit of trouble. Of course, if he does manage to part those waters, I won't complain one bit.

It's kind of a weird feeling to have your guy lose, especially since this was my first time voting. But at the same time, I feel privileged when I think that in my short twenty-three years of being on this earth, I have seen the destruction of Berlin Wall, the unity of the nation after the attacks of 9/11, and the election of a black person into the highest office in the land. I hope that this victory is more than simply cosmetic, and for the sake of the land I love, I pray that Barack Obama turns out to be the best president that we ever had.

Regards, best wishes, and change I now have to believe in,

-Cecily Jane

I Voted! Early!

My Dear Reader,

After my fifth-or-so attempt at registering to vote, I finally have the opportunity to do my civic duty. I say this to make it clear that I'm not a political slacker; the facts are that I have filled out registration forms three times without actually getting registered. I don't know what happened--maybe there was some kind of glitch, or maybe I'm just stupid at filling out registration forms. Either way, it took me the fourth time before it went through, but I changed states before I could vote. So I registered again. In Oregon. There seemed to be no problems the fifth time, as my voter registration card and my ballot arrived in the mail on schedule. That's right; I got my ballot in the mail. Automatically. It was just plain awesome.

You see, Gentle Reader, I have recently learned that Oregon has this very original approach to voting: 100% absentee ballots. Essentially, they send every registered voter a ballot in the mail, and each voter can fill it out and mail it back at his or her leisure. And as for all of those "what if"s that are piling up in your head: no worries. If you really want to vote at a polling place (or have to, as in if you happen to be homeless), you can do that. If you make a mistake on your ballot, you can just go and get another one. The only bone I have to pick with this system is that you have to put a stamp on your ballot when you mail it off, since you are essentially paying a fee to vote. I realize that the fee is only 42¢, but it's the principle of the matter. Of course, if you don't want to mail your ballot, you can just drop it off personally. So maybe I don't have that much of a case.

But here's the really cool thing about this voting system: you can fill it your ballot out as you go. Okay, so I obviously haven't voted the normal, polling place way, but I imagine that it's a little like taking a test: you study beforehand and dump all of your information right there in the booth. Instead, the 100% absentee ballot method turns the process into a kind of take-home, open-book test. It means that you can sit on your couch, at your desk, or wherever, and have your ballot by your side as you research the issues and decide which you want to pick. You can research the candidates for position A, make your decision, and vote for your choice. Then you can move to proposition C, research the pros and cons, and vote for your choice on proposition C.

Then you can take a break, do something else, and finish voting later. I think that this is a good idea because sometimes people only have the time to figure out how they stand on the high profile candidates and measures. And sometimes, this means that some people make their decisions on the low profile stuff, they just choose at random. I'm not making this up, as studies have shown that the candidates put on top tend to get more votes than their opponent(s).

Anyway, I'm just really excited to finally have a say, even though I'm just one person, and even though I'm a registered Republican in a very blue state.

And if you're still studying the issues, you may want to check this site out: BallotPedia.org. I only found the site an hour ago, but it seems to be balanced, informative, and cool enough. And no pressure, Howard, just remember everything depends on this.

Regards, best wishes, and the democratic process,

-Cecily Jane

P.S. Okay, so I didn't end up posting that story I promised. If I post it before November, can we still be friends?

Next Up: NaNoWriMo

My Dear Reader,

Things are going to change a little bit in November, since it is NaNoWriMo, or National Novel Writing Month. It's essentially a group of writers who get together online and motivate each other to do an amazing feat: write a 50,000 word novel in only thirty days. The idea behind it is that everybody has a novel inside of them, but some need a little bit of help to get it out of their brains and onto paper. I know that this is true by experience, since half of the time I tell people about my almost-done novel, I find that they have a novel that they want to write, too.

I know that there are a lot of people out there who don't think of themselves as writers. I wonder if these same people would feel more capable if they thought of it as storytelling. All you really have to do is tell a really, really long story. I think that the sweetest part of NaNoWriMo is that it doesn't matter if your story is awful; it's just about finishing. It's a race, and it's hard to get to the finish, but your only competition is yourself. And even if at the end you've written the worst novel in existence, you still get that sense of accomplishment. It's that special feeling you get when you are sitting quietly by yourself and think, "I'm a novelist."

I "won" NaNoWriMo last year, and I intend to do the same this year. I've got a mystery/thriller-ish novel lined up, with some characters that I've been working on for years. Here's a cover mock-up that I put up on my profile page, under the pseudonym of TheOtherOne:


The biggest change that I foresee in the next month is that I will be posting a count of how many words I've written so far. The next change is that I will post an excerpt of my novel every Friday, which means that yes, I will resume posting every Friday.*

I would really hope that you would take this challenge on with me, Gentle Reader. I'm always here if you need some encouragement. Just go to http://www.nanowrimo.org/ and sign up. I promise it will be worth it. Either way, you'll get to see where I am come November 30th.

Regards, best wishes, and 50,0o0 words,

-Cecily Jane

*And I've got a great story lined up for this Friday, by the way.

Yes on 8!

My Dear Reader,

I've already posted more on politics than I ever thought that I would. At the same time, I feel that there is at least one more thing that I need to say on the subject, so please consider this post on California's Proposition 8, which would ban homosexual marriage in the state. In short, I absolutely, completely, support Prop 8. I think that voting to pass Prop 8 is the moral, ethical, and wise thing to do. Period.

Now, you may be wondering, Gentle Reader, why a person who is registered to vote in Oregon has anything to say on the matter. The truth is that I almost didn't, because this is a state matter, and because I'm not a resident of that state. But I used to be. I was raised there and I still consider California my home. In addition, I was in this fight from the beginning, and I want to see it finished.

This all started back in 1999, when I was a freshman in high school. That was when an initiative called Proposition 22 was on the ballot. Though I was barely fourteen at the time, I knew how important it was that the proposition be passed. And it was a really, really big deal for everybody. Kids at my school wore Prop 22 signs as shirts. We put up signs everywhere, and we put up with the consequences, such as nieghbors and friends who called us intolerant to homosexuals, among other things. We told them that it wasn't about tolerance at all. It wasn't about hating gays, it was about our religious views. (Our religious views, by the way, prohibit us from hating gays.) It was about our belief that each child has the right to be raised in a home with a mother and a father. It was about our belief that both motherhood and fatherhood are so sacred, and so important, that their combined influences on a child cannot be duplicated by any other social organization. It was about our belief that the role that traditional marriage has in society is elementary, and if tampered with, will have horrible consequences. Why do Mormons consider this a religious issue? Why do we feel it appropriate to allow our religous beliefs to influence our vote? President Gordon B. Hinckley said it best at the same time Prop 22 was on the ballot. The folowing is a quote from his address given in October of 1999:

"'Why does the Church become involved in issues that come before the legislature and the electorate?'

I hasten to add that we deal only with those legislative matters which are of a strictly moral nature or which directly affect the welfare of the Church. . . . We regard it as not only our right but our duty to oppose those forces which we feel undermine the moral fiber of society. . . . Such is currently the case in California, where Latter-day Saints are working as part of a coalition to safeguard traditional marriage from forces in our society which are attempting to redefine that sacred institution. God-sanctioned marriage between a man and a woman has been the basis of civilization for thousands of years. There is no justification to redefine what marriage is. Such is not our right, and those who try will find themselves answerable to God.

Some portray legalization of so-called same-sex marriage as a civil right. This is not a matter of civil rights; it is a matter of morality. Others question our constitutional right as a church to raise our voice on an issue that is of critical importance to the future of the family. We believe that defending this sacred institution by working to preserve traditional marriage lies clearly within our religious and constitutional prerogatives. Indeed, we are compelled by our doctrine to speak out.

Nevertheless, and I emphasize this, I wish to say that our opposition to attempts to legalize same-sex marriage should never be interpreted as justification for hatred, intolerance, or abuse of those who profess homosexual tendencies, either individually or as a group. As I said from this pulpit one year ago, our hearts reach out to those who refer to themselves as gays and lesbians. We love and honor them as sons and daughters of God. They are welcome in the Church. It is expected, however, that they follow the same God-given rules of conduct that apply to everyone else, whether single or married.

I commend those of our membership who have voluntarily joined with other like-minded people to defend the sanctity of traditional marriage. . . . You are contributing your time and talents in a cause that in some quarters may not be politically correct but which nevertheless lies at the heart of the Lord’s eternal plan for His children, just as those of many other churches are doing. This is a united effort."

What better words could be said on the subject? What better words could be said on the issue at hand? President Hinckley, a man who I personally regard as a prophet of God, a man whose addresses lifted and strengthened me in the darkest times of my life, spoke true and eternal words that day, as he did every other day. We listened to his words back in 1999, and we passed Proposition 22 along with 61% of California's population. And as soon as we found ourselves in victory, with our values protected, an official or two decided that the people's voice wasn't valid. So, in short, we have to finish the fight we started nine years ago by passing Proposition 8. This isn't about tolerence; it's about protecting our values, and protecting marriage and the family. Period.

For better words than mine, visit http://iprotectmarriage.com/, http://protectmarriage.com/, and http://www.preservingmarriage.org/.

Regards, best wishes, and morality,

-Cecily Jane