fashionista_35

Never, never, never read the comments sections to online articles. That way lies madness.

Normally, I don't, but I got suckered in this time. Article yesterday on scholarship and romance in the USA Today. While overall a good article, I was irked by the front half, where the writer seemed to need to get all the snarky clichés off her chest before she could settle in to write the article, proper. I also don't happen to think that "scholarly" writers empower romance, nor do I think a writer's individual scholarship legitimizes the genre, in and of itself. However, I can see how it can give the gloss of legitimacy in the eyes of the mainstream and like I said, overall, a positive article, so let's call it a win. Especially since in the print version, there was a page-wide banner running beneath the article for Nora, proclaiming her a New York Times Bestseller and one of America's favorite authors. So let's call it a win.

But then there were the comments.

Some were of the "oh, not again," variety. You know, the women read/write romance because they can't get laid, blah, blah, blah... Ignorant drivel for ignorant readers, blah, blah, blah...

Some were laughable, like the spy novel enthusiast who derided romance novels as "formulaic."

This was the same chump who said romance was unoriginal and formulaic and that he had a professor at a Respected Christian University who wrote romance (a man) and that he used an outline and just filled in the blanks and that it fit the Harlequin mold.

Whatever. Ignorance strikes again. It's tiresome and yes, it makes me grumpy even as I shrug it off.

And I don't know... I think the current state of the world is having a very strange effect on many writers. They're either feeling as if they have to go the humble supplicant route. I mean, thanking a reviewer for a crappy review? Really? Of course, some say that they're doing it to mess with the reviewer's heads, but seriously, not that subtle. Worse still, to me, is the "Oh, I take negative reviews and learn from them." Dude, the only thing you should learn is that the reviews are simply one person's opinion. Maybe the reviewer had a bad day or didn't get it, or *gasp* simply didn't care for the book. It hurts, yes, and you should fume mightily, but move on.

Oh, and don't take to social networking sites to blast the reviewer/critic. Yes, I know it's last week's news, but it's a timeless lesson. That was some seriously bad form.

I mean, writers should just feel free to write their stories the way they want (with their editor's guidance where needed). The same way a reader is free to like or dislike. I had a reviewer absolutely hate my dialogue and sentence fragments. Too bad. I just don't happen to think that First Person should be written in the Queen's English, unless the character is, you know, the Queen. So bite me, Grammar Snoot. I'm not going to take that review and allow it to change how I write. Nor did I feel the need to write a thank you note.

And why does it always have to rain on the days I have to transport my three very large dogs to the boarding facility.

Four years ago this weekend (this day, really) I wrote the four thousand word proposal that became Adiós to My Old Life. Two weeks later, it had sold, exactly a year later, on July 4, 2006, it was released.

If you'd told me four years ago that I would be published in YA before adult fiction, I would've probably said, "Shyeah, right." If you would have told me two years ago, (immediately post-RITA, an unthinkable accomplishment in and of itself) that four years after selling my first book, I'd still be waiting to sell in adult fiction, I would've asked where you kept the funny mushrooms.

And of course, if, two years ago, you would have told me that I would have an editor solicit me to write a book, that I would sell into hardcover, and then sixteen months later, it would all be taken away, I would have accused you of being plain mean.

Yet...

*looks back at events of last four years*

All so, so weird.

And yet, this year, I'm essentially free. Perhaps that's the independence I'll be celebrating. Along with continuing my fight to become the writer I want to be.

Drum corps & jazz. Specifically, the Concord Blue Devils and Dave Brubeck. First off, hard to believe that it's been fifty years since six seminal albums were released, taking jazz to a whole new level.

Miles Davis- Sketches of Spain & Kind of Blue
Ornette Coleman- The Shape of Jazz to Come
Charles Mingus- Mingus Ah Um
John Coltrane- Giant Steps
Dave Brubeck- Time Out

Of all six albums, Time Out is the one I'm most intimately connected to. It was my first real jazz album. I've owned it on vinyl, cassette, CD, & digital download. When I was in jazz band, I played both Blue Rondo a la Turk and Take Five. I was absolutely fascinated by Take Five the first time I heard it. It was my first experience with irregular time signature and that Brubeck was playing on my instrument, the piano... le swoon. It felt slightly naughty and wicked and I understood why jazz clubs were so often portrayed as dark, smokey environs. It seemed as if music like this could only be gestated and born in those dark corners, the clink of glasses and the quiet murmur of conversation as background. Allowing for the musicians to feel even more as if they were locked in their world, giving them the freedom to experiment. My greatest regret in life is that while I was a serviceable jazz pianist in terms of being part of the rhythm section, I absolutely sucked at improvisation. I was too locked into my extremely classical training and couldn't let go. It was assuaged somewhat by the fact that I learned I had some improvisation skills as a vocalist, but it still broke my heart that I would never play like Uncle Dave.

Then, when I joined drum corps, my love for jazz and really, music as a whole, only grew. It's such a magnificent art form, athleticism and artistry wrapped up into a powerful package that reduces me to goosebumps, even to this day. My greatest creative growth happened in those three years I marched drum corps. I learned that there were absolutely no limits, no boundaries, and that all was possible if you could only imagine it.

I give you my example: The Blue Devils Drum & Bugle Corps, long my favorites (after the Florida Wave, of course *g*) performing Brubeck, with a soupçon of Bernstein thrown in. There's a reason these cats have been DCI champs more than any other corps. And this (a universal this) is why I chose drum corps as my backdrop for the Carmen story.

Symptoms since last Thursday:

Ears- hurt

Sinuses- hurt

Nose- congested with a side of raw, no matter how many Puffs with Lotion I use

Lips- chapped

Tastebuds- in absentia

Fever- comes and goes. Luckily, been fairly rare.

Yet, being a whacked-out Virgo, I've been feeling guilty that we haven't been able to do any summerlike activities. When I mentioned maybe taking the rugrats to the community pool, I got threatened with bodily harm if I even thought about it too hard. All I intended was for them to cavort while I sat in the shade. Yeah... not happening. There are limp dishrags with more energy. So of course, I thought, "Maybe the beach tomorrow..."

Ha!

Two things- the Boy got sick last night although luckily his seems to have been a one-time stomach thingie and it's thundering and raining this morning, which, actually, does it make me a bad Mommy that I'm kind of joyful? This sort of weather makes me feel very calm and happy and actually makes me more productive.

I've got puppies sitting at my feet and I'm making good progress on the Carmen revisions when I'm not utterly out of my head on Sudafed. When I have been too out of my head to work, I've been (gently) shaking my head at Authors Behaving Badly, chapter 472.

Some people really need to stay away from social networking.

However, I want some Earl Grey but don't feel like getting up to make it. I need a Cabana Boy.

This week I started revising the Carmen manuscript (officially) for about the fifth or sixth time. Don't laugh-- I know this is nothing for a lot of people, but generally, I edit and revise so much as I work on an initial manuscript that by the time I'm done with the first draft it's more like a fifth or sixth draft. As a matter of fact, both of my published books were turned in, one editor-requested revision on each, and then done, so this is sort of a new experience for me. Anyhow, my new agent had some really great suggestions that didn't make me recoil in terror (best sign that she is just the Right Agent *g*). For obvious reasons, I hadn't had the heart to look at the MS in ages. Actually, until I started the agent search in May, I hadn't looked at the MS since I submitted it LAST May.

At any rate, where I find myself floundering a bit is in how well I know this manuscript. I lived with it for sixteen months as I worked with the editor at The House That Shall Not Be Named and even after not looking at it for a year, I know it like I know the back of my hand. I know these characters so well-- yet what my agent's asking for is a bit deeper characterization. And I know she's right. My thing now is in trying to find the balance between adding more characterization and not hitting the reader over the head with the Clue By Four. I'm just finding it insanely hard, because of how well I know the MS. I tried working on a blank document, but that didn't work so well. Apparently, I really, REALLY know this manuscript. In other words, it works better for me to have the original doc handy, which keeps me more aware of changes.

I just have this recurring nightmare of making all these changes, but nothing really changing. Or making sense. Or reading like a Dick and Jane book.

GAH.

Posting about entitlement (Yeah, I couldn't let it go.) If you've got any opinions one way or the other, I'd love to hear your takes.

Check it: Romancing the Blog. Quoted Neil Gaiman and everything.

School's almost over. (Thank you, GOD) And perhaps I'm a bad Mommy, but I don't have a single "scheduled" thing lined up for the rugrats this summer. I just couldn't cope with the idea of setting alarms to get them to camp and such. Feh. I just want them to have a summer where they can laze about-- we'll go to the pool and we've got a family trip planned for the Boy's birthday this July. They'll go visit their grandparents, of course, but beyond that, it's SUMMERTIME for heaven's sake. Let the kids be kids, y'know?

Okay, mini-rant over.

Last night, lacking a baseball game, I turned to the NBA playoffs as background noise. And once again found myself wondering, "What do they put in the water in Brazil?" (And this is considering I don't normally care for boys with crazy/wild frizzy hair.)

( Behold, the Cleveland Cavaliers' Anderson Varejão. )

Seriously, I don't know what they feed those boys down there.

I think I mentioned it here before, but for some reason, I tend to start listening to a lot of Mary Chapin Carpenter round about summertime. I know, bizarre, right? Especially since she's the quintessential introspective singer/songwriter. Just a fantastic storyteller with her music. Seriously, go read the lyrics to Only a Dream, and maybe listen to it afterward and tell me it doesn't leave you wanting to cry.

But one of my absolute favorite songs and performances of hers was from the "Women of Country" special from the early nineties. She performed "He Thinks He'll Keep Her" with the best backup vocal group ever.

Seriously.



All right. Off for a massage in a bit. Deep tissue. I expect to be a puddle later this morning.

I sort of asked this in my previous post, but it really deserves its own breakout question.


Which of the genre writing/book awards do you respect as a reader? If you saw "Nebula winner" or whatever on the cover, or you see the winners list posted somewhere, you'll at least go check out the books if not buy outright?


When you see that a book has won a particular award, what does that automatically bring to mind, specifically? Like when I see "Newbery" I tend to think "Oh, issue book," which is perhaps unfair, but it has been trending that way for years.

I'm trying to put together some information with respect to the various writing/book awards out there and would love some help from those more well-versed than I in terms of the inside scoop.

Here's what I've got so far-

Edgars- Mystery Writers of America, first given out in 1946, books are judged by member panels. (12 categories)

National Book Awards- National Book Foundation, first given out in 1950, publisher submitted, books are judged by a 5-person peer panel nominated on by previous winners, finalists, and judges and given an honorarium of $2500 by the Foundation. (4 categories)

The Hugo- World Science Fiction Society, first given out in 1953, books are submitted and voted on via open nominations from the general membership. (14 categories)

The Nebula- Science Fiction & Fantasy Writers of America, first given out in 1965, open nominations by Active and Associate members in good standing. (6 categories)

The RITA- The Romance Writers of America, first given out in 1982, books are judged by member panels. (12 categories)

Bram Stoker Awards- Horror Writers, first given out in 1988, open nominations by members. (8 categories)

Okay, so what am I missing? Is there not a specific thriller award? Those of you familiar with the awards processes/histories of any of these, give me some general impressions-- are the awards respected within the writing community and/or by the general public? Do they help with sales or respect? Yes, I do have my own opinions and impressions on some of this, the RITA in particular, but I'm keeping mum for the moment.

Oh, and reason why is because I'm putting together my next column for Romancing the Blog. Or at the very least a rant for this blog. We'll see.

The man seriously rocks as he expounds on the topic of readers and their entitlement issues.

The whole thing is wonderful, but here's my favorite part of his response to a fan asking why hasn't George R.R. Martin finished his latest yet and why is he being so damned evasive about saying when he will be finished with it?


George R.R. Martin is not your bitch.

This is a useful thing to know, perhaps a useful thing to point out when you find yourself thinking that possibly George is, indeed, your bitch, and should be out there typing what you want to read right now.

People are not machines. Writers and artists aren't machines.

You're complaining about George doing other things than writing the books you want to read as if your buying the first book in the series was a contract with him: that you would pay over your ten dollars, and George for his part would spend every waking hour until the series was done, writing the rest of the books for you.

No such contract existed. You were paying your ten dollars for the book you were reading, and I assume that you enjoyed it because you want to know what happens next.

It seems to me that the biggest problem with series books is that either readers complain that the books used to be good but that somewhere in the effort to get out a book every year the quality has fallen off, or they complain that the books, although maintaining quality, aren't coming out on time.

There's just so much calm wisdom in this passage-- I may just print it out and frame it.

And remain forever grateful that I have yet to be hit with an idea for an ongoing series.

I am such a gigantic dweeb.

There I am, writing along, and I throw in an offhand reference to Revlon's Cherries in the Snow lipstick. Which leads to me googling to doublecheck, because I'm almost certain that Cherries in the Snow was around in 1964, but I want to make absolutely sure and I knew that Fire and Ice had been around, so I could always use that, but I really, really wanted to use Cherries in the Snow.

Which led to reading about how Dorian Leigh was the model for both ad campaigns and was indeed, considered the first supermodel, only eclipsed by her little sister, Suzy Parker, who became the face of Coco Chanel and downloading pictures of both because they're so striking and very evocative of Natalie and Eva, my female leads. Oh, and how Charles Revson really, really freakin' hated Estee Lauder.

And... two hours later, I have ascertained that yes, Cherries in the Snow was available in 1964.

I iz dorktastic.

::facepalms::

Oh, and for those who might be wondering...

Dorian/Natalie



Suzy/Eva

One of the best, most well-balanced articles on romance fiction and why the genre is doing so well during the recession with some insights that proved to be surprising to author Joanne Rendell over at HuffPo.

Yes, the term "bodice-ripper" is used, but not in the way you might think.

My favorite part?

Romances offer very different things to very different readers, therefore, and to lump the genre and its audience together is short-sighted - and problematic. This point was driven home to me during Professor Emily Haddad's paper about the depiction of the Middle East in romances featuring sheikhs. Haddad drew on Edward Said's theory of Orientalism which describes the way the West constructs and "others" the East through its writings and discourses. For too long, romance has been the "East" and "other" of the literary world: talked about in generalities, pigeonholed, and not understood for its nuances and variety.

I may not have gotten my answer for why romance is selling so well in our troubled times, but the Princeton conference taught me that to rush to conclusions about romance fiction is to flatten out a rich, varied, and continually evolving genre. In the end, though, I did conclude one thing. People read and enjoy romance just as people deal with hard economic times: differently.

Sort of a slate gray-green?

This past week, Princeton University was host to Love as the Practice of Freedom? Romance Fiction & American Culture. Yep, that's right. An Ivy League university played host to a romance fiction conference. The list of presenters drew from the worlds of academia as well as the writing, editing, and criticism spheres of romance fiction, meaning it was fairly well represented. If I were to air any complaint at all, it would that given the focus was its influence on American culture, I would have liked to have seen some representatives from the Latino and Asian writing diaspora represented as well, in the interests of greater balance, but make no mistake-- a conference of this nature is a huge step. And makes me v. v. sad I couldn't attend because really, this is a confluence of two of my favorite things-- romance fiction and critical thought, analysis, and discussion.

Which is great in theory, but of course, a kerfluffle erupted.

Through various sources, I received updates of what was going on and by yesterday, the thing apparently generating the most commentary was a screed delivered by Michelle Buonfiglio of the site, Romance B(u)y the Book. I don't use the word "screed" lightly; by all descriptions, it was a blistering attack on certain segments of the online population with respect to romance readers, reading, and criticism, with the not-so-subtle attempt to paint herself and her site and accomplishments in a positive light by comparison.

My first response was shock-- something like this at an academic conference where the idea is to present romance as a viable subject worthy of critical analysis and discussion? Then I heard that her address was online, so I went to read it. And as I read, my heart sank and all I could think was, "Oh. My. God."

And again, let me emphasize:

Oh

My

God

Second thought was, "Just because you use a few ten-cent words doesn't make you sound academic or intellectual, sunshine."

That had to be one of the most condescending, self-serving, thoroughly clueless pieces of tripe I've read since most of Sarah Palin's responses to interview questions during the Presidential campaign. The irony inherent in the majority of what was written/said during that address is that it employs the very Mean Girl techniques of which Ms. Buonfiglio is so dismissive. She insults anyone who doesn't criticize books in a "nice" way, insults the intelligence of anyone who registers a domain name and encourages discussion, insults readers who "apparently never met either Strunk or White," while attempting to justify such commentary by insisting that it was she who ultimately learned from them.

She claims that because of her techniques of gently leading viewers (which is her term for readers) to simple language which would be used to express disagreement, she has "a digital record of thoughtful commentary about romance fiction and related topics without miles of vitriol and anger to wade through to get to the gems of reason and respectful dissent and thoughtful counterargument."

But here's the thing-- disagreement doesn't have to be gentle to be constructive or valid. You all know I'm a huge proponent of constructive criticism and debate, but I also understand that debate can grow exceedingly heated, especially if the subject is close to one's heart. In fact, I appreciate the passion that drives one to want to make their point. It's not an easy form of discourse-- but rarely has anything of worth in academia ever come about in an easy fashion, a fact hammered home to me earlier today when I was helping my son study for his upcoming World History test. They're currently in the Age of Reason and Scientific exploration and we were talking about all of the advances and theories that Galileo stated in his lifetime. And the fact that he was summoned to Rome and tried for heresy for making the outrageous claims that the universe was heliocentric as opposed to geocentric, because everyone knew that God created the universe and of course, that meant the earth was the center of the universe and to say otherwise would be to defy the Word of God. Under intense pressure from the Roman Catholic Church, Galileo was compelled to recant most of his theories, no doubt a serious blow to a man of science. But he stayed alive, made meticulous note of his theories, and they were later supported and expounded upon by other men and women of science, church be damned even some within the church, as sartorias gently pointed out. (*proclaims self guilty of hyperbole in pursuit of emphasizing a point*)

It wasn't easy, it wasn't pretty, it most certainly wasn't gentle or "nice," but in the end, the strife and fury and anger, the ability to maintain conviction while making concessions were necessary to move our understanding of science and how the world works forward.

The romance genre is on the precipice of enormous change right now, coping with the vast changes in how it's disseminated and enjoyed, attempting to open the doors to new and varied readers while maintaining the ties to its roots, and at its heart, redefining itself for a new generation so it can move forward. Trying to find its rightful place within the fabric of the literary tapestry. That it and other genre fiction deserves a place there is in no doubt in my mind, and obviously, not in other people's minds, considering the very nature of this conference/symposium.

Movement forward is rarely accomplished without cost.

A "defense" such as Ms. Buonfiglio's serves only as a significant step backwards in terms of respect or consideration.

Yep, you read that right. For the first time since my grad school years, lo, so long ago, I am going to review a book. Or at least blather at length.

The book? Beyond Heaving Bosoms: The Smart Bitches' Guide to Romance Novels. coming to you, straight from Hot Pink Bitchery HQ braintrust of Sarah Wendell and Candy Tan.



Okay, let's get some pesky formalities out of the way. I know and consider Sarah to be a friend. We've shared meals and drinks and snarky emails on what's bordering on too many times to count. And Candy, while a continent *sob* away and a ridiculously busy law student, is one of the funniest, brightest, most creatively foul-mouthed individuals I've ever met. That puts her way up on the Happy Scale for me. And because I know both of them, I can hear them, on every page of this book. Reading this book is like chatting with friends. Friends I can debate with, even disagree with, but at the end of the day, you respect the hell out of them.

(I also realized that the reason I've had so much trouble with my adult books is that I'm Doin' Everything Wrong. *snerk* Heroines who enjoy sex, beta heroes-- oy! It all makes such sense now!)

( Okay, that's out of the way. Let's get on to the good stuff )

So, you ask, where the hell are the cabana boys?

Keep yer knickers on, y'all. They come to us this week courtesy of Ms. Sarah Wendell herself, in this quick and dirty interview I procured with her. Hit it:

Barb: Okay, let's have it. Your best "let's get it on" playlist.

Sarah:

"Tie Me Kangaroo Down, Sport," by Rolf Harris
"Gabriel's Message" by Sting
"Theme from Monday Night Football"
"Theme from Riverdance"
"Gin & Juice" by the Gourds
"9 to 5" by Dolly Parton
"Taba naba" by the Wiggles
"Come Clean" by Hilary Duff
"MMMbop" by Hanson

Barb: Ah, the Parents of Toddlers Let's Sneak Off and Get Some playlist. Well do I remember those days.


Barb: A Cabana boy or three of choice

Sarah: Hottest guys? The ones who smolder: Colin Firth, Daniel Craig, Matthew
Macfadyen. Rwor.



Barb: I'm sensing a Darcyish theme here. And British. Not that there's a damned thing wrong with that, right? Right. Oh, what the hell-- one more Firth, in Mark Darcy mode, for good measure.



Barb: What would a romance hero need to do in order to seduce you?

Sarah: Have one: that'd be my husband. He cooks us dinner on weeknights when
I'm busy, he helps me prioritize so I don't get overwhelmed by
everything I have to do, and he unquestionably supports me and
believes I can do pretty much anything. And he's been known to tell me
to take a nap. that alone is seductive.

Barb: Awww... we loves us those kinds of heroes, we do.

Barb: Okay, being a self-serving bitca, I do have one semi-serious question: How do you see the importance of YA with respect to the romance genre?

Sarah: I think that there is a space and a need for YA romances within the
romance genre, particularly because YA romance deals with similar
issues as adult romance but addresses them from a unique perspective.
The hero and heroine's search for self-actualization, autonomy, sexual
agency and self-determination are completely different when seen
through the lens of a YA narrative. The meaning of those terms, and of
concepts like innocence, rebellion, and conflict, is underscored in a
completely different way when the age of the heroine and hero is
younger.

Okay, y'see why I love these people? Thank you Sarah and Candy for such a wonderful read and thanks Sarah for answering my somewhat silly questions.

Oh, and psst... almost forgot. If you comment, I'll do a blind drawing and the winner gets their very own copy of the Guide. Maybe, just maybe, I can even get Sarah to do her best John Hancock. (And again with the dirty-- it's a sickness, I tell you!)

Just bits and bobs floating through the transom that is my brain, of late.

1. Why is it that writing in third person POV is like pulling teeth for me? Is it because I feel like I'm caving to the demands of The Man with respect to the genre constructs of romance? Or is it just because it's not the natural outlet for my voice? But at the same time, I've been feeling as if I'm hitting a rut with first. I want to challenge myself and continue to grow as a writer.

2. I really dislike how some people have this way of blaming their lack of progress on the fact that the rest of the world just doesn't recognize their geeeeeeeeenyus. And that the reading world is somehow going to shit because people actually read for enjoyment and that enjoyment is more often than not, genre-flavored.

Mmm... way to stick it to every genre that doesn't meet your lofty standards there. Actually, way to stick it to every genre, period. Full disclosure: this is the same author with whom I engaged in a bit of a kerfluffle on a writing forum when she said, "I would rather read Cormac McCarthy any day than Rowling. McCarthy writes books for adults. I am an adult."

Dontcha just love the implication that young adult novels are somehow beneath adult readers? She even said so. Said that adults who read YA weren't stretching themselves intellectually.

See, and I know there are people who are going read her post as blistering honesty. And maybe, to a certain degree, it is. But at some point an author has to take agency and make their own choices based on the available information. Using myself as an example-- do I think Breathe deserves to be published? Oh, hell yeah. I have to believe in my own work, or else, why do I continue to do this? But I also have to understand that right now is not the time for this book. I may even have to accept that there may never be a time for this book, much as that might break my heart. And yes, I mock the sparkly! and it makes me very, very angry in a deep, dark part of my heart. That the industry becomes so short-sighted and tunnel-visioned. But-- it is what it is. Above all, publishing is a business. I can't expend too much energy worrying about what everyone else is doing. All I can do is know that with each book, I'm writing the best possible book that I can. That with each book, I continue to improve. That I write stories that I know fulfill something for me and that have the added benefit of touching people. To keep faith that at some point, I will hit that magic crossroads where the books I write and the demands of the public meet. And even if that moment doesn't arrive, I keep writing, because it's what I do.

(And side note, if I ever come off sounding that arrogant and bitter, please, to take me out back and shoot me? k? I'm counting on y'all.)

3. The Marlins are 8-1. Heh. Then Yankees lost their debut opener at their shiny, new $1.5 billion dollar park. 10-2. To the Indians. Double heh. (Sorry, omnis_audis I promise, I'll stop now.)

4. My darling bud, Thom Zahler (a fantastic artist and if you don't have his great comic series, LOVE AND CAPES, really, you should get it. Like, now.) forwarded me this fabulous link to the longest trailer for the Wolverine movie that I've seen yet, complete with Hugh pimping Free Comic Book Day on May 1st.



Mmm... Hugh. Mmm... Gambit and the glowy red eyes. Let's take a closer look at those, shall we?



*is shallow*

I need an icon of that. With something pithy as a caption. Anyone wanna make me one? *bats non-glowy eyes*

5. Don't know how many of you ever watch Cold Case-- yes, it's formulaic, but they do it very, very well and sometimes, they just hit one out of the park (and the baseball metaphor is very apropos here). This last week's episode nearly broke me. Basic plot was about the unsolved death of a Cuban baseball player. One of Cold Case's hallmarks is their use of music-- they've even built entire episodes around a single artist's music (like Springsteen). This past week, the final song they played was so haunting and lovely, I just had to go dig it up and finally found it-- called "Vida Mas Simple" (A Simpler Life) by Cuban-American artist, Nil Lara.

Listen to it here.

6. Speaking of breaking me, Sweets on last night's Bones? I just want to cuddle him and feed him milk and cookies, poor wee lamb.

That for my playlist I can totally mine all my 70s and 80s music, plus indulge my cheese factor.

No, seriously--check it:

Come On, Let's Go- Los Lobos
Centerfield- John Fogerty
Girls in Their Summer Clothes- Bruce Springsteen
Enter Sandman- Metallica
Dead Man's Party- Oingo Boingo
Saturday Night- Bay City Rollers
Wild Boys- Duran Duran
Under Pressure- Queen & David Bowie
True Faith- New Order
Renegade- Styx
The Boys of Summer- Don Henley
Dreams- Van Halen
Baba O'Riley- The Who
Otherside- Red Hot Chili Peppers
Paradox- Kansas
Don't Stop Believin'- Journey
Alive and Kicking- Simple Minds
In the Stone- Earth, Wind & Fire
The Kids are Alright- Matthew Sweet & Susanna Hoffs
Kiss Him Goodbye- The Nylons
Nothing Else Matters- Metallica
Mad World- Adam Lambert
Vida Mas Simple- Nil Lara
Rise- Will Dailey


Heh.

I'ma gonna leave this post with my two favorite players of the last few years:



And my current faves:



I love baseball season...

I need baseball icons.

It just demanded I download Eric Carmen, the Definitive Collection

Something's definitely afoot.

"Dream big and dare to fail," Hetfield said to the audience. "I dare you to do that, because this (Metallica's success) is living proof that it is possible to make a dream come true."

--James Hetfield (Metallica), April 4, 2009
Rock & Roll Hall of Fame Induction Ceremony

That may just become my new mantra.

Simultaneously one of the most exhilarating and terrifying expanses.

There are ideas floating about and characters taking shape.

I think it's time to face the blank page once again.