Quantcast
Channel: Hillary Manton Lodge Fiction
Viewing all 131 articles
Browse latest View live

The 2012 Oscar Red Carpet Gown-a-pol-ooza

$
0
0
I had so much fun researching the guild awards and events leading up to the Oscars that I thought it would be fun to review the fashions of the red carpet. Since fashion is ultimately objective and I love a good second opinion, I asked my Mom, Ruyle, and my sister, Susannah, to join me. Ruyle has a special place in her heart for Starbucks, snowmen, quotable movies, kindergarteners and Belknap Springs in winter. She is the happy mom to her three kids, and admits that we do keep her (and my dad) amused on a regular basis. Which means we have succeeded. Susannah is a student at the University of Oregon in Eugene, OR. She enjoys all things movie and music related. Susannah especially holds dear the entire Gilmore Girls Canon, and will always find a time to quote it whenever she can. So - let's dive in!

Jessica Chastain, McQueen
Hillary: Chastain Redemption! After an awards season that has been cluttered with Gowns That Should Never Have Been (I'm not even going to link to pictures because several of the truly ought not to have been), Chastain pulls out this little McQueen number, and the world breathes a sigh of relief.

Ruyle: I love it!

Susannah:The dress compliments her hair and really flatters her in all the right places.  She went for simplicity with earrings and a few bracelets, and I applaud her for that.  My only wish is to have seen those shoes, personally I think some strappy black stilettos would have been perfect.





Rooney Mara, Givenchy

Hillary: It’s....got eyelids. And it doesn’t fit her. And...eyelids.

Ruyle: At least the eyelids are *happy*  (come on,like the cartoon faces!)

Susannah: I can appreciate what Mara was trying to do. I think it fits her quite well, I love the skirt, but yes the “eyelids” are a tad...um...well to put it simply-unnecessary.
Hillary: I mean, at least it’s not black, you know? I just wish she’d found a seamstress to tailor the bodice, and asked Monsieur Givenchy to sew down the dixie cups. Or something. I like it from the waist down, though.





Octavia Spencer, Tadashi Shoji
Hillary: Octavia is awesome. She can dress herself beautifully, something women half her size can have trouble with. She looks like a million bucks, she deserved the win. I want her to take Christina Hendricks shopping - Christina would go home with clothes that FIT, and they’d have a great time.

Ruyle: Octavia nailed it here.  Excellent idea to send her shopping with Christina!

Susannah: What I love about this is that it is so flattering on her, and all the lines hit her in all the right places, plus she keeps it light on the accessories letting the dress make the major statement.  Only concern was when she went up to receive her Oscar, she literally wobbled..., but you know what?  I’ll overlook it :)






Emma Stone, Giambatista Valli

Hillary: Oh Emma, the bow.  It takes away your neck. It blocks your airways. It’s the size of your head. It looks like something Nicole Kidman wore once.  I wish you had worn this instead. Or this.  Something that doesn’t look like it could be a hiding place for Voldermort.

Ruyle: Again, five minutes with a seam ripper and VOILA!

Hillary: No joke! Also, a stronger lip color. I think there needs to be someone at the Oscars, hiding in the restrooms, who removes superfluous dress details. It’s for the greater good.

Danny: The Greater Good.”

Ruyle: Pick Me! Pick Me!

Susannah: This dress could have been absolutely perfect without the bow because it looks like she will be swallowed whole by it, and honestly it looks to me as if she needs more support in the bust area.  Other than that, her accessorizing was tasteful and the clutch was very nice, and her hair has the perfect updo.



Michelle Williams, Louis Vuitton
Hillary: I like this a lot, from the front. The back (back of the bodice, specifically) is really, bad. But if you look at just the front, it’s pretty great. Wish she’d ditch the pin, though. It’s distracting.

Ruyle: Darling.  Possibly the only winning peplum featured dress of the night.  Agree about the back...what were they (designers) thinking?!

Re: The figure behind Michelle: Ladies, remember, Spanx is your friend.

Hillary: Ooh - hadn’t noticed. But yes - shapewear!  And now I can’t look away. So did you not like the peplum on Tina Fey’s dress?

Ruyle: Tina’s dress was ok, but when I look at it, I see PEPLUM and I like the subtler look of peplum on Michelle’s dress.

Susannah: I adore this dress on Michelle, it flatters her, it is a bold color for her, and I love the peplum.  I happen to think the bow is a nice light touch, and again she just accessorizes with a clutch, and a simple necklace.  I wish I could have seen the shoes for this.

Melissa Leo, Reem Acra (!?)
Hillary: An unmitigated disaster. In my original tweet post, I said she looked like an administrative assistant from the armpits up, and Barbie from the armpits down. But when I saw the whole thing and THAT SASH...

Barbie says no to sad, saggy, superfluous sashes.  So I don’t know what to say, other than no.

But her hair is nice. And the shoes look cool.

Ruyle: Sorry Melissa, I was prepared to go to bat for you until I saw...The Sash.  I liked the look from the waist up (above sash).  I liked the mix of styles and sequins, the casual, understated hair...but, you lost me with...well you know.

I just want to rewind the tape and take the dress for a little “pre-Oscar magic” ala the dress makeover in What A Girl Wants before the Debutante Ball.  I WANT TO FIX IT!  ...it’s a mom thing.

Hillary: I love it! I need to see that movie again. So - what if it were a cocktail dress? No sash? Almost cute? Where’s Susannah - WE NEED YOU!

Ruyle:  We could make it a cute strapless cocktail dress, nipped in here and there for great fit, or leave it full length.  Either would be lovely.

Susannah: Overall this dress to me is bleh :/  The sash doesn’t cinch her waist and give her shape in any way shape or form.  The only great thing about it is the shoes.  It doesn’t flatter her in any way and accessories don’t do much to save this catastrophe either.  

Hillary: Do you think shortening it to cocktail length might have helped? With a teal or royal blue clutch?

Susannah: To me this dress just is not an Oscar worthy dress and is unsalvageable to me.

Hillary: I nominate this Donna Karan look as a substitute. Still within Melissa’s aesthetic, but not, you know, awful. Or this, from Carolina Herrera.

Susannah: I would choose the Donna Karan look, age appropriate and of course it’s a classic black and white combo.

Hillary: Okay - so I was thinking about it while I was putting my makeup on this morning.  I also think this Oscar de la Renta would have been kind of fun and whimsical, but still have the sleeves that Melissa likes.


Ellie Kemper, Armani Prive


Hillary: Best dressed of the Bridesmaids, and might be one of my faves overall. Great colors, great sparkle - am a fan.

Ruyle: Totally agree. It all came together beautifully for Ellie.

I could give the 2nd Best Dressed Bridesmaid award to Wendi McLendon-Covey.  What can I say? It was pink, sparkly and frothy.  

Hillary: I need a pic. I do not remember.  

Ruyle: I’ll work on that.  I only saw it briefly on stage and had to hunt it down! But I do like it much.

Susannah: Ellie no doubt to me is the best dressed of the bridesmaids.  She chose a color that really compliments the red in her hair, and I love the bangs.  Plus the earrings I adore because they take some of the gold from the dress and highlight it, and bring in a little bit of red to make sure we don’t forget that it is there.

Wendi McLendon-Covey


Hillary: You don’t think it washes her out?

Ruyle: I like to think in person it doesn’t.  It’s a delicate look for her delicate features.

Hillary: I can live with that. But she needs bangs. Imagine the look with bangs and a slightly brighter pink lipstick.

Susannah: This is definitely a very pretty dress, but it isn’t what I would call a statement dress, but overall Wendi looks beautiful.


Shailene Woodley, Valentino
Hillary: I waffle on this. I should probably hate it, but I don’t. Instead, I find this dress to be very Uma Thurman-ish. It’s attractive...but you don’t really know why.

Ruyle: Hmmm...I’m thinking White House Dinner here, understated and elegant, but not Oscar worthy.

Susannah: I happen to think it’s actually a very nice dress, it’s very classy and elegant and she looks very grown up.  Which when you’re in the ABC family show/soap opera “Secret Life of the American Teenager”, you want to look more grown up in real life and stay away from your TV character.  I applaud her!

Hillary: Yay! And I thought the hair and makeup were pretty great. She wore the whole look - it didn’t wear her.





Stacey Kiebler, Marchesa
Hillary: When bad dresses happen to good people.  Now, when Georgina Chapman speaks on Project Runway, All-star, I’m going to yell “Giant Hip Rose Or Possibly Tree Knot!” at the screen.

I like the bodice, though. And the hair. I hope Stacey goes on to do nice, spunky things when she and George break up.

Ruyle: I’m sure she will and they will remain the best of friends.

Hillary: I hope so!

Susannah: All I can think is simply this...there is a rose growing out of your hip...EMERGENCY SURGERY NOW!

Hillary: STAT! That would actually make a fairly awesome Grey’s Anatomy episode.  Ooh! Or ER! George will know what to do!!!

Susannah: *smile* :)




Meryl Streep, Lanvin

Hillary: Go on, Meryl. You won the award. Caress the Firth’s face. You’ve earned it.

Ruyle: He’s good with that.

Susannah: I think she knew she would win, the gold dress practically matches her lovely Oscar :)

Sandra, fixing George’s face.


Hillary: I now want them to be a couple. So. Much.

Ruyle: Awww...I so agree.  Kind of reminds me of Brad and Angie at last year’s Golden Globes when she was adjusting his cute little bowtie..it’s a wife thing.  

BTW, I did like Sandra’s dress very much, and partly because of the stunning back which you get a tiny look at here.

Hillary: I did like the back. I also try not to think about the front.

Susannah: Dress wise I loved it, at first I wasn’t quite sure about it, but then I saw the back...and fell in love



Penelope Cruz, Atellier Versace
.  
Hillary: Favorite dress on-screen - I thought it looked more green then. But it was wonderful, and it moved beautifully, and her styling was adorable. Possibly my very favorite.

Ruyle: LOVE this dress on Penelope, the hair, the jewelry...She radiates confidence and pure Hollywood glamour = A+

Susannah: For some reason the color of the dress is bothering me.  If it had been in a darker jewel tone, that would have been more preferable. Otherwise, I love the style of the dress and the accessories and hair.  Again...need to see shoes!

Hillary: I think the red carpet threw off way the dress photographed by countering the green tones (kind of like how the trim on my house looked WAY purple until we put the grass in - and then the excess red went away. Pretty much). Because it was seriously stunning on screen.  That said, I *do* think that it’s important to make sure a dress photographs well for events like this.


Natalie Portman, Vintage Dior
Ruyle: I don’t know what I like better, her lovely, vintage red ball gown or her pre-Oscar red carpet interview with Robin Roberts, when she responds to Robin’s question about Billy Crystal as the night’s Oscar host: “....he’s not going to be mean...”  Love It.

Hillary: I want a different necklace. I want a pearl necklace with a pearl and ruby pendant. Diamonds and swiss dot - I’m not feeling it. Unless it was a black swiss dot.

Which it’s not.

Susannah: I actually happened to like the necklace, the dress not so much.  To me it looked a lot like an elongated version of a prom dress, and she needed an updo for this dress to make it more elegant in my opinion.

Hillary: You’re right - a more 50’s-style updo would have matched the look better. If you’re going to go vintage, go vintage. Just not like Miley Cyrus.

Susannah: Agreed :p

Hillary: Speaking of Miley Cyrus and blue nail-polish, can we take a minute to appreciate the woman behind Natalie? I mean really appreciate?  Because she’s pretty great. And by great, I think Yzma would appreciate the styling.

Missi Pyle, Valentina Delfino


Hillary: This dress is, apparently, eco-friendly, with repurposed zippers. What the who, I just thought it was pretty.

Ruyle: It is pretty.  I would like to see her walking in it.  Just say’in.

Hillary: Leetle steps.  To match her leetle carbon footprint.

Susannah: Honestly, I just don’t like this dress.  The top half yes, but the bust isn’t fitting her very well, the skirt is just weird, and I don’t like the off the shoulder.  It just looks like a very mismatched dress, with different parts of a dress sewn together.  I do like her hair...but that’s about it.

Livia Giuggioli, Valentino
Hillary: I actually guessed this was Valentino when I saw it. Showing this picture rather than the full-length one makes it so you can get past the dress and focus on how cute they are.

Rather than get stuck on the phrase crumb catcher.

Ruyle: True she didn’t snag a winning dress, but, she got Colin... *sigh*

Hillary: And that’s what matters! (And, honestly, if it weren’t for the Ruffle That Shouldn’t Have Been, it’s a really cute dress).

Susannah: Yeah not wild on this dress, but hey she has a Mr. Darcy by her side, how much better can you get?

Hillary: (Mr. Darcy and a good dress. Just sayin’.) Wiith Colin’s affinity for choosing strong roles, though, she’ll definitely have a second (third, fourth) chance.



Jennifer Lopez, Murad

Hillary: If she’d had full sleeves, we wouldn’t have been able to tell how toned her arms are.

Ruyle: Oh Jen.  Just call me next year.  For you, I will make the trip.  We’ll go shopping, hit Starbucks and find you “The Gown” and you’ll love it.

p.s. I have solid connections, and her name is Hillary.

Hillary: p.s.s. If you think your diva attitude will work on my mom? Think. Again.

Susannah: I like this dress, and I don’t like it at the same time.  The plunging V neck needs to be a tad bit higher, and a less severe bun.  The lines of this dress work and don’t work at the same time...yeah.




Hillary: I liked this when I saw it on camera, but up close and holding still, the bodice is a bit of a tortured mess. Her breastage looks awkwardly squished. And something happened to her skirt when she got out of the car.

But, her husband was very sweet and loving being her Oscar date, she was enjoying her real hair, and she looked like she had a great time. At least she wasn’t dressed as Annie Hall, or something.

Ruyle:  True, the bodice could use a little “tweaking” but the color is fabulous on her and talk about toned arms!

Susannah: I agree about the bodice, I would have had it as a sweetheart or just a plain strapless.  The jewel tone is perfect and she looks confident and poised.



And finally:

Angelina Jolie & Leg, Atellier Versace. And Skin.


Hillary: I have a whole scenario about how this came to be. It’s frankly the most logical conclusion.

It goes like this:

Angie’s at home with Brad, Sunday morning, and she’ SO TIRED AND JET LAGGED. I mean, she just flew in from Eastern Europe promoting her film, which she wrote and produced and directed and created from the dust of the earth.  Because she is a Serious Actress, this is all very tiring. And while she did go to the theater the day before to rehearse, even that took a lot out of her.

Just when she’s thinking - “hey, I wish I could stay home, but I can’t, ‘cause Brad got nominated, so I can’t even pretend to break my foot while chasing my child who was chasing a goat, like Halle Berry” - who should ring the doorbell but Lea Michele!

Yes, Lea Michele from Glee.  She’s going door to door because she found a stray kitten and is trying to figure out from whence it scampered. But she sees Angie, who’s exhausted, and is all, “Hey! Let’s switch bodies!”

And Angie, who tends not to like award shows and attention, leaving right after she presents, running from Ryan Seacrest, and generally eschewing such activities because she is a Serious Actress, believes the idea has merit.

She asks Brad.
Brad: “My hair is shiny.”

So Angie (now in Lea Michele’s body, since they held hands and had a Freaky Friday moment) goes off to take a well deserved nap.  And Lea (in Angie’s body) goes to pick out a dress.  She opens Angie’s closet.

Lea: “Black, black, boring, caftan, black, caftan - hey! Velvet with a slit! I can work this!”

And this is indeed true, as dresses with high slits are like catnip to Lea.

Lea gets dressed, and she and Brad hit the road.  

Brad: “Are you sure you’ve got this?”
Lea: “So. Totally. You?”
Brad: “My hair. It shines.”

Now, Lea has never met a spotlight she’s not wanted to soak into every pore of her being.  But tonight - of all nights - she’s with Brad Pitt, in Angelina Jolie’s body. Her foot hits that red carpet, and POP goes the leg! She cannot help it. This is what her leg will do in dresses with high slits, and the leg wants what the leg wants.  She continues this down the red carpet, basking in the glow.

Now, Lea knows she has to blend in a bit, make people BELIEVE that she is Angelina Jolie, Serious Actress.  But when she walks to the front of the stage in that velvet dress with that high, high slit -

- under those lights -

- with all of those people -

And she decides - hey! I’m at the Oscars, and who knows when I’ll be back?  And so POP goes the leg.  Because she is Lea Michele, and she brings fabulousness to the stage.

(This works out pretty well for all - Lea, for the attention, Brad, because of his shiny hair, but Angelina is horrified in the morning to find out that her leg has a Twitter account, because she is a Serious Actress, and what will people now think of her Serious Idea for a Film set in Afghanistan??)

That’s honestly all I’ve got. Trust me - think on it, and it will make sense.  At least, about as much as anything else.

Ruyle: Ok, so I had a dream about Brad Pitt last night.  I said, “so Brad, is there some back story to the whole leg thing with Angie?  If you “can’t say” it’s ok, I was just curious.  Brad demurred.  So, I continued, “did you know there’s a whole site on the net with pictures of Angie’s leg photo bombing?” Brad laughed and said “NO!”  “Here, I’ll pull it up for you” I said.  When it came up, he whipped out his camera and took a shot of it on the screen.      

Crazy, no?

Hillary: No. This is very valid.

Susannah: Truthfully I actually loved this dress...she looks great in it and she knows it...I’m pretty sure she was probably singing to herself in her head “I’m Sexy and I Know it” or something along those lines.  Plus she provided good material for some Oscar winners to imitate and mock her for her pose, and you know what they say...imitation is the sincerest form of flattery ;)



Hillary: Here’s the writing team for The Descendents, and writer Jim Rash, who took awesomeness to a whole new level.

Because really? That’s what writers do.

So, Mom - what would you have worn to the Oscars?

Ruyle: I like this Temperley London - without the hat and necklace of course.


Susannah: I picked this Valentino, though with less of a V-neck. The back is very pretty, though.


Hillary: It's very pretty! I looked at LOT of dresses, and finally settled on this one by Monique Lhuillier.


It's blue and it's shiny and poufy and I twirls.  I'm sure :-)

Thanks for joining us, everybody!

A Little Romance: The Mechanics of a Love Story

$
0
0
I've been asked to appear as an expert, of sorts, for middle school writers.  The subject? Romance.


Yeah, I know.  I struggle with smooshy, mushy romance.  But they asked for romance, so romance they shall have.  I spent some time thinking on the subject of Romance Theory (which seemed to dovetail with the blog on The Vow, come to think of it).

Good romance is the most character-driven of all genres, so if you're going to do romance (or a believable romance subplot/thread), you've got to know your characters and be able to communicate their essence on the page.



I mean, *really* know your characters.  Because the reader has to believe both characters as people, be invested in both of them, and believe that those people could/would be into each other. Obviously, there will be obstacles - that's what drives the turning of pages.  The reader has to:

a.) want the two characters to get together

and

b.) not be certain it's actually going to happen.

If one of those is missing, you've got a problem. If the reader doesn't want them to get together, she (we'll just assume the gender here) will hate you in the end when they do.  And if you make it too easy, there's not enough plot.  The love story can't be a foregone conclusion.  There have to be roadblocks, there have to be difficulties. For your characters - your hero and heroine - to be motivated enough to persist through those roadblocks, they have to be more than likable. They have to be desirable.


(Sorry. The italics just kind of happened there.)  If you skip out on desirability, your reader will sit/read/watch and yell at the character (the one who's romancing the undesirable) to RUN, RUN FAST, RUN FAR, IT'S NOT WORTH IT!

Think of The Bachelor, for this one.  Sure, the girl the guy likes most may be pretty, but if she's also evil, no one will want them to actually fall in love.

Conversely, it can also be a problem (for some plotlines) if your characters are too desirable.  The Vow is a good example -  they were both too pretty and desirable for us to believe they weren't even remotely attracted to each other. If one or both of your characters are very pretty (either inside or out), there had better be some good obstacles!


A spontaneous moment of love. Or not.


As far as I can tell, there are three core types of romance -

1.) The "will she/won't she" romance - will the heroine fall in love with him? Will she??  Stories that fall into this category include Pride and Prejudice, Emma, Anne of Green Gables,

2.) The "will he/won't he" romance - will he fall in love with her? Austen examples include Persuasion  and Sense and Sensibility. YA examples include Anna and the French Kiss and The Princess Diaries.

3.) The "can they be together" romance (a variation on this is how long will they be together - especially applicable in Nicholas Sparks books).  The Princess Bride is a good example.


Those are the core types.  Many stories are a combination of the two. Stranger than Fiction is a "will she/won't she" with a twist of "can they be together" - Maggie Gyllenhaal's character has to decide if Harold Crick, the tax man's flours are charming enough, but even after they all for each other, there's this niggling reality that Harold Crick is going to die.

You've Got Mail is a "will she/won't she/can they be together" mashup - they fall in love online first, but have to reconcile their real lives and true selves with their online personas before they can be together.

I've always wanted to ride awkwardly on the back of a bike
on the beach. Haven't you?

Something to consider with love-triangle plotlines - it's still a will she/won't she with a twist of  which one should he/she choose (most successful triangles involve a woman choosing between two men).  It can be kind of  a cop out. The question is "A or B?" rather than "Do I love A with my whole heart? Or should I ditch A and B because this situation is disturbing?"  My take is the same in fiction as it is in real life -  if you really can't choose, the answer should be neither - because you don't love one enough to give up the other.

(This is why I'm neither Team Edward or Team Jacob, but rather Team Go Find a Strong, Reliable, and Loving Human Man With Less Baggage.)

My personal preference is for a combo of the core types - it gives the characters two kinds of drama.  While you're figuring this out, though, you've got to make sure you're maintaining both believability and likability.  It also works best for stories where the romance is a subplot. Your main plot throws your characters just as many curveballs as their love lives.

So - there's my short masterclass on plotting romance. What do you think?

Brief Update: Found this rather awesome article about female stereotypes in chick flicks - you know, the women you see onscreen but NEVER meet in real life. Worth the read.

The Spring Thing

$
0
0

I am usually not much a fan of Springing Forward. Every year, I whine and complain about why we still have Daylight Savings and why do they want to take a precious hour of sleep away from meeeeeee???

Like I said, not my fave.

(I do not, however, have these feelings in the fall).

However, now that we live in a more northerly location, it gets dark. Way dark. Dark by 3:45 in the winter kind of dark, which is really pretty depressing. I know there are far darker locations (say, Alaska), but after a dimly-lit winter, when a friend of mine mentioned we'd have an extra hour of light soon -


- it was the best news, ever! Like getting a birthday gift on a day that is nowhere near your birthday, just for being alive. Losing an hour was a completely fair trade - I would give two for the extra daylight.



One way to get through Daylight Savings, without the sleep-deprivation-angst, is to help your husband move five tons of river rock. It actually works really well.  By the time we were done last night, it felt hours later than the actual time, rather than and hour earlier. Mission accomplished.

Terribly excited about that rock, though. One of the joys of a new-build house is having basically no landscaping whatsoever. Last fall we seeded the backyard (the front had sod) and put cement curbing around the edge. But the grass came in really thin in places - and thick in others, partly because the sprinkler system turned out to not actually be going off.

Which was a problem.

So we've wintered with thin grass, open vats of dust/dirt on either side of the patio, and dirt/dust/weeds on the other side of the curbing.  Let's just say it was prettiest when it was covered up with snow.

Danny picked up river rock on Friday afternoon, and Saturday and Sunday we hauled it off the trailer, wheelbarrow load by wheelbarrow load (with breaks for Danny to pump the tire back up, as it tended to go flat quite often), and dumping it onto the weed cloth-prepped areas. And honestly, the yard looks SO much better! There's more work to be done before we can move on to fun things - like plants - but the yard is off to a great start.

Tesla also thinks the yard is pretty great - in particular, the weed cloth.  We left the unopened rolls outside on the patio, which she discovered is shaped rather like a giant dog toy. There was much joyful leaping and running with the roll of weed cloth until I stepped outside to retrieve it.

So that was our weekend - how did you handle the loss of an hour?




Sundry (mostly about the dog. A little about writing, but mostly about the dog).

$
0
0
Things are pretty quiet around here. It's nice. After SO much travel and change, getting into a boring home routine is kinda great.

We've got family coming up next week - so the quiet part will change - and a wee bit of travel to Bellingham in the near future, but until then it's nice to enjoy the house and the less-wigged-out dog.

Speaking of, Tesla is loving life right now. When she's not spending time in elegant repose (and bear with me as ALL of these photos were taken with my phone)...




...she enjoys chasing her ball in the backyard.


Tongue hanging out, tail up, ears flopped kind of loving. I know - not wildly original, but still new to her. We've only had a fence since winter (Danny finished putting it up in the snow) and now that the weather isn't freezing or consistently blustery (to the tune of 30 mph winds), we can go out and chuck the ball around for her.

She likes a walk as much as any other dog, but she'll fuss and whine to go outside to play ball. And when she's run for a while and worked up some thirst, she'll stop and drink from her handy-dandy snow shovel.


Yes, she has an actual outdoor water dish. But it doesn't have a built in ball holder! This version is so much better. She can drop her ball into one side and know that it won't rolls away while she'd drinking.

This makes perfect sense to me. What doesn't make perfect sense is this:


Lo, the hole.

(When I took this picture, I didn't realize her nose was in it. But the nose makes it that much better).  She digs from time to time. She loves digging around the sprinkler heads, and digging after the trash the builders left behind. I get that. What I don't get is that she decided to dig through the (new) layer of river  rock, through the (new) weed cloth, and continue for another six inches.

I don't know why. I find myself admiring her fortitude while being perplexed at the same time.

Oh well. At least she was happy. As a dog prone to anxiety, crankiness, and sudden mood swings (she is a girl, after all), it's nice when she's happy.

In other news, still no news to report on the publishing front. Friends, family, and readers (three overlapping groups, to be sure) will frequently ask for news, but truly - there's nothing much to tell. I'm still in the submit-proposal-wait-by-phone stage for the time being.

However, I've finally gotten through the really thorny setup part of the book and able to move on. This is nice - writing and rewriting the first four chapters gets old. But they're finally in a good place, and the characterizations are working, and everyone who needed new names has new names, and life is good. I'm really loving the project and the fact that the topics involved are things I'm interested in, and yet there are also things for me to learn.

I've got a really fantastic lentil recipe to post, but I'm waiting until I have pictures. I have pictures of the uncooked lentils, but the soup itself is so ugly that I've put off photographing it. I'm hoping that with a dollop of yogurt and a dusting of lime zest, it'll pretty up a bit...

...but it's seriously the ugliest yummy food I can remember eating. So we'll see how goes :-)

Well that's what we're up to this spring - playing with the dog, working on the house, cooking lentils and writing books about imaginary people. What are you up to?

Anne with an "e" knew what she was talking about

$
0
0

I renamed a character this week.

I have a thing about names. Some authors are pretty relaxed about them. I think that's great - it's just not me. When I create a character, the name is one of the first things I have to nail down. Otherwise, it's like making a friend whose name you don't know - who does that?

(Actually, I do sometimes. I'm not always great with remembering names. But when it happens, it's VERY uncomfortable and certainly not ideal. Not in real life, and not with made-up people).

With the book I'm working on now, it really became necessary to change several names of central characters. For a couple people, that was fine and downright easy.

But the others? Not so much. You see, these people are half French and half Italian. They're practically a super-species, if by "super" you mean "super stubborn, super strong-willed, super opinionated." And you know what?  They did not appreciate the name change. Not. One Bit. One character even flat-out refused.



The trickiest, though, was the main character, the heroine - I couldn't get her name to stick.

I tried "Ava." Pretty, right? Elegant, right? The name had all of the right things going for it (aside from being in the top 5 girl's names for 2010).  But Ava didn't stick - it was like putting shirt onto a toddler who had no intention of staying dressed.  She just kept shrugging out of it every time my back was turned.

When I name characters, I rely on two websites - Nameberry and Behind the Name. The former has names plus a certain amount of commentary, and lots and lots of lists per name type. Behind the Name is more etymological - it has names, meanings, and origins, so if you need a French name or an Irish name or a Serbian name, they're all in easy, definable lists. I'll flip between the two sites as I come up with names and variations on names that I want to try out on a character.

When you try out names, plug the name into an existing chapter (preferably one where the name comes up a few times). Ask yourself -

  • How does the name look on the page, within the text?

  • Does the name match the character's dialogue and gestures?

  • How does the name fit with the other character's names? If it's too similar, which name do you want to change?

  • Is it easy to for the reader to discern the pronunciation? This is particularly important if the name is in the title.

I strongly recommend, when you can, naming character groups at the same time. Whether it's friends, family, or coworkers, that way you remember the names and can see how they interact with each other.


A few things to keep in mind when naming groups -


  • Friends - if you're naming a friend group, the friends should sound as though they were named by different sets of parents. Depending on the group of friends, the names may have a similar feel - if they're all prep-school girls, their names are going to be more WASP-y than if it's three girls who met at a summer camp on the California coast. In Simply Sara, the young women Sara finds herself befriended by are named Sonnet (possibly favorite character name EVER), Britta, and Meg.  In Plain Jayne, Jayne's friends are Kim, Gemma, and Joely.

  • Sibling sets - should sound as if the names came from the same parents, obviously. In both Jayne and Sara, the kids in the Burkholder family have biblical names but not always traditional biblical spellings. I wanted Sara to be a Sara, no "h" so it would be a little more modern. Because of that, her oldest sister became Rebecca rather than Rebekah. In my current book, all of the siblings have either French or Italian names, and ideally names that sound or look the same in both languages.

Now, in a lot of real sibling sets, the names might look or sound rather alike - starting with the same first letter, or have spellings with a certain letter. In fiction, though, it might be difficult to discern on the page and a pain for you to remember which one's which.


For your own sanity -

  • Keep a list of character names in a separate document. Anytime you use a name, write it down. This will be VERY helpful later on, especially when you're doing edits and sequels.

So those are my tips - what are your methods for character naming? As a reader, what kind of names do you prefer? Have any character names tripped you up?


Lessons from Hollywood - The Hunger Games vs. John Carter

$
0
0
This post is the first in a "Lessons from Hollywood" series focusing on writing/publishing truths gleaned from Tinseltown. I've written similar posts in the past (Writing lessons from Eclipse, for starters), but now such posts will have a club of their own to belong to.

Anyone reading about films and box-office reports will have heard that The Hunger Games has done very well. Games had a strong opening weekend and has continued to dominate.


Conversely, Andrew Stanton's baby, John Carter, has gone down in flames.




Both movies were inspired by popular novels. The Hunger Games, obviously, by the bestselling Suzanne Collins novel of the same title, and the John Carter from Edgar Rice Burrows' A Princess of Mars.

Edgar Rice Burrow's other fictional hero provided a steady cash flow for Hollywood for years - 89 Tarzan movies have been made between 1918 and 2008. The John Carter stories, known as the "Barsoom" books, contained source material that inspired  Star Wars, Avatar, and Cowboys and Aliens. If you're looking for pulp-fiction pedigree, this is it.

And yet, the recent John Carter will likely become one of the most expensive flops in Hollywood history.

What happened? And what can we, as fiction writers, learn from it?


How The Hunger Games got it right:

The novels are YA releases with broad crossover appeal, and the film aimed for - and reached - the exact same audience.  Sure, it's geared to teens, but the high-concept premise holds a great deal of appeal for younger adults as well as parents.  Yes, most of the main characters are teens. But they're smart, likable teens who have lived difficult, tragic lives. They work hard. They're resourceful. They've been let down by the adults in their lives but they're not whining - they're too busy surviving.

The books are character driven, and while the film is somewhat less-so, the central character of Katniss is compulsively compelling. While the novels have a love-triangle romance plotline, it's less of a central element than in, say, the Twlight franchise.  Gary Ross's film is sleek, well-filmed and well-styled. The film doesn't look like tween-fare. The content from the novel could easily have steered the film to a more limiting R rating, but quick-cuts and smart angles kept the film relatively accessible for the core audience.


How John Carter got it wrong:

Oh, boy. I feel for Andrew Stanton, I really do. I'm a huge fan of some of his work. But I think there were several places where poor choices were made that turned John Carter into a downed zeppelin.


Who is the audience for John Carter?

  • Is it older children/tween/family fare? From the look of the aliens and the casting of Friday Night Lights' Taylor Kitsch, you'd think this would be for the audience of Phantom Menace, a sort of Diet-version of George Lucas. But the pic is rated PG-13, so it eliminates (or should, at least) the older kiddie crowd.
  • Is it fans of the book? Maybe. But readers of Burrow's Edwardian-Era novels are likely too literate to put up with much of the dialogue shown in the trailers.
  • Is it adults? Are adults going to be drawn to the goofy-looking aliens and a release with a poster heralding the Disney logo?

Maybe if John Carter had decided to skew older, cast an older actor, looked a little grittier, and called itself the ultimate origins story - it might have helped.  Or if it had gone the other direction, and made itself more of a PG popcorn flick, fine. I honestly think Carter's biggest issue is an inability to identify its core audience.

True, the title didn't help - John Carter of Mars was more evocative, but the "of Mars" part got dropped when Simon Wells' Mars Needs Moms similarly tanked. And the fact that John himself wasn't as strong and likable of a character onscreen was problematic.

And, I don't think the metal-bikini-clad princess did a whole lot for the project, either. We live in different cultural times than when the Barsoom books - and Star Wars - released. When you've got Katniss Everdeen feeding her family, saving her sister, and surviving the arena all while fully dressed, the under-clad woman sensibility felt dated and done.


How Authors Can Get it Right:
  • Know your audience. If you're like me, you write for people like you - and that's okay. But figure out who your audience is and write a book you'd all enjoy.  Be conscious of who your characters are and the readers you're wanting to attract. 
  • Be sure to package it correctly. This is your publisher's responsibility, but if you have concerns about your cover/back cover copy, your agent needs to be on top of that. A book is judged by its cover. It's a fact of publishing life. If your cover skews too old, too young, too silly, too serious - none of these things will be good for your sales in the long run.
  • Write a strong, likable main character. Yeah, I know it's obvious. Is it easy, though? Not at all. If your central character is compelling, complicated, but likable, people will forgive a lot. Look at the Dragon Tattoo books - people waded through a lot of awkward prose and sandwich eating to read about Lisbeth Salander. 
  • Concede to the times. Write strong female characters. Include minority characters. Make everybody complicated. What the hey - put a bird on it. I'm just saying, timely fiction resonates with people. You don't have to kowtow to trends, but it's unwise to ignore them altogether. And for pity's sake, enough with the metal bikinis. At the very least, a girl needs a little spandex sometimes.


So those are my thoughts - what do you think? And how much should Stanley Tucci be invited to guest judge for Dancing with the Stars?


          

Chocolate

$
0
0

...is also the name of a song that I like. (Yes, most music videos tend to be strange and I'm still unsure as to the logic behind their creation. Lead singer Gary Lightbody is blinking like vintage Hugh Grant (or even not-so-very -vintage Hugh Grant, which leads you to wondering why the man seems to have had dust in his eyes for the last twenty or so years) and that moment with the ladybug wigs me out a bit because we've had to remove three ticks from the dog in the last week alone, and if this is a post about chocolate I really should stop writing about ticks.

Sorry.

I meant "kicks."

Really. Bear with me - there's an amazing recipe in this post!




I made these last week for our church's mid-school girls; the week before I promised them that if they wrote out an actual list of uncompromisable traits in a future spouse, I would have something for them and they'd like it a lot.

Naturally, all of the girls forgot.

We found paper.  Because these cookies were not going to be ignored.

I'm not a huge cookie baker.  If I bake, I tend to bake for company (often cupcakes) or fruit desserts that I rationalize because they have fruit, and therefore have some measure of dietary value.  But I was baking for junior high girls, and I'd found this recipe, and it looked sinful and without dietary value *and* using mostly pantry staples.

Seriously Sinful Fudgy Chocolate Crinkles

You will need:

 1 1/2 cups bittersweet chocolate chips (about 9 ounces), divided (I had mini chips and some leftover baking chocolate squares - technically, this is one of those recipes where if you have high-quality chocolate, you should use it, but if you don't, don't let it stop you)
3 large egg whites, room temperature
1 1/2 cups powdered sugar, divided, plus more for rolling
1/2 cup unsweetened cocoa powder
1 tablespoon cornstarch
1/4 teaspoon salt

1.) Pull the eggs out of the fridge so they can achieve room-temp status.

2.) Preheat oven to 400°. Line two baking sheets (or one big one and one small one, which worked fine for me) with parchment paper.

3.) Melt 1 cup of the chocolate in a glass bowl/measuring cup in the microwave, heating it in 30-60 second bursts and stirring in between until smooth.

4.) Mix the cocoa powder, 1/2 cup powdered sugar, cornstarch and salt in a separate bowl. Give it a stir.

4.) Beat the egg whites until soft peaks form. Slowly add 1 cup powdered sugar until well incorporated (the original recipe says "until mixture resembles soft marshmallow creme." What does that mean?? I didn't know exactly, though having cooked with marshmallow fluff over the weekend I have a better idea, but how exactly do marshmallow cream and marshmallow fluff differ? I do not know. I do know that I hate vague recipe instructions. So beat the stuff until it seems mixed up enough. This recipe seems pretty forgiving).

5.) With the mixer running, add the dry ingredients to the sugary egg whites, followed by the remaining 1/2 cup chocolate. (Note: I used my Kitchenaid whisk attachment for the egg white beating, but found the paddle attachment to be more effective for the rest of the ingredient mixing).

6.) Depending on where you live and the temperature of your home and the position of Mercury, the cookie dough will either be. 1.) stiff or 2.) runny like brownie batter. If it's the latter, just chill the batter in the fridge for 20 or so minutes - it'll firm right up.

7.) Place about 1/2 c. or so powdered sugar into a small bowl. With a tablespoon measure, scoop dough, roll it in your hands, and roll it in the powdered sugar. Place on cookie sheet; give them a teeny smoosh onto the sheet, just so they don't roll all over the place when you move the sheet.

8.) Bake for 8-12 minutes, until the cookies have puffed and crackled and set just enough to not make a mess.

Makes about 18.

What you should know about these cookies -

They are genuinely amazing. Tasting one of these cookies is like falling in love.

That is not even an exaggeration.

These are not munching cookies. These are savoring cookies. They're quite rich (astounding, really, because they're quite low in fat). But like a good husband, one is all you need.

If you make them up, tell me what you think!

Spring 2012 Movies!

$
0
0
I find it such a relief when a.) the weather warms up and b.) the movie releases start to be less stupid. The drought between awards season and springtime in the film world is such a sad, sad time.

Luckily, we had Hunger Games to tide us over.  Let's look at what's ahead until Summer Solstice...

Damsels in Distress - 4/16




Yes, I know that *technically*, this already released, but it hasn't released here, and I live in hope that either 1.) it will or 2.) I'll be able to see it during a forthcoming trip. I love the idea of a tribe of girls who, dressed as Betty Draper, go out to civilize the natives (i.e. fratboys) with tap dancing. Add Parks & Rec's Aubrey Plaza and Adam Brody, formerly of Gilmore Girls and The O.C, and I have every hope for a slightly twisted charmfest.

A girl's got to dream, right?


The Five-Year Engagement - 4/27



I seriously can't imagine being stuck in wedding-planning mode for five years, but I'm willing to watch Emily Blunt try. Blunt's been due for a breakout hit for a while - she's had Meryl Streep gunning for her since The Devil Wears Prada. It's anyone's guess if Five-Year Engagement will be her Bridesmaids moment (you know that comparisons will be inevitable), but the supporting cast won't hurt - Alison Brie (of Community and Mad Men) and Chris Pratt (Parks & Recreation) are the best friends (of sorts), and Mimi Kennedy (Midnight in Paris) and David Paymer (The American President, The Good Wife) play Jason Segel's parents, and Segel himself is getting all sorts of great press for finally bringing more than a tenuous smile to Michelle Williams' face.


The Avengers - 5/ 4


I worry, to be honest.

Yes, this is on the list. But I have deep, deep concerns that this will be a scattered, quip-filled mess. I say that as a Joss Whedon fan, and I'll be the first to admit that he's made a name for himself working with ensemble casts. The thing with his ensemble casts, though, is that they're always centered around one very strong main character. Even in an ensemble piece like Ocean's 11, Danny Ocean is the guy you know best. You know what motivates him, what he wants, and what he's willing to do to get it.

Will the motivations be this clear with so many characters who are main characters in their own realms? Difficult to say. But I am a fan, independently, of Jeremy Renner (who was great on his guest spot on House before The Hurt Locker made him a thing), Chris Evans (who managed to portray about half of the guys I ever worked with at summer camp in The Losers), Mark Ruffalo (who had me at "We're not friends anymore, Jenna,"), and Robert Downey, Jr. (obviously). But together?

We'll see. I'm willing to find out.


The Moonrise Kingdom - 5/25


Oh, Wes Anderson. When you're good, you're really really good. When you're uneven, you're still entertaining and surprising, so it's okay. I loved The Incredible Mr. Fox, and I'm quite excited about this project, which looks like an affectionate amalgamation of classic film styles and tropes. Also loving - the casting of Frances McDormand, Tilda Swinton, Bruce Willis and Edward Norton. Note: the script is co-penned by Roman Coppola, son of Francis Ford, sister of Sofia.

Also: the use of Henry Purcell's Abdelazar theme, which tends to wind up in Jane Austen films is a nice touch.


Snow White and the Huntsman - 6/1


I don't know about you, but I'm tired of all of the press the Tale of Two Snows has managed to generate. Obviously, Tarsem's project tanked at the box office. The trailer for this one, helmed by newbie Rupert Sanders and written by Evan Daugherty (another newbie with a Robert DeNiro/John Travolta film in post-production), John Lee Hancock (The Blind Side), and Hossein Amini (Drive), has a much stronger looking trailer *until* Kristen Stewart starts talking.

Now, I'm not a KStew hater. I thought she was great in Adventureland, and it's about as fair to judge her acting ability in the Twilight franchise as it is Natalie Portman's in the Star Wars prequels.

However, not everyone can pull off a vaguely English accent, and the bits that we hear from dear Kristen sound forced (and they are bits - in two of the three trailers I've seen, there is a conspicuous lack of the title character actually talking).

But it looks terrific visually, and appropriately dark for a Grimm tale, and a gently wonky accent didn't sink Ever After, so we'll see how goes.


Safety Not Guaranteed - 6/8



Another limited release, meaning I may not see it until it hits DVD, but I find the idea to be charming and quirky, while realizing that "quirky" has become one of those overused words, like "edgy." I recognize that Aubrey Plaza seems to be playing another version of April here, but I'm not convinced that it's necessarily the wrong thing for the story. At some point, though, she might want to diversify if she don't want to be stuck delivering deadpanned one-liners (delicious though they may be) for the rest of her career.

*****

I know Prometheus is supposed to be a "deal," but honestly it looks scary, and I prefer my Ridley Scott movies to be costumey and historical with gunk in the air and a rousing speech or two about doing the right thing.

Tesla, however, had her own take.


I do not get the feeling that she is much impressed, in the end.

So - summer officially starts on the 20th of June - what movies are you looking forward to? 

National Clean Out Your Purse Day!

$
0
0
If you told me that there was a government conspiracy to make the month of April, like, *disappear*, I would totally believe you. If you said there was an ongoing plot to do the same thing to May, I would nod my head emphatically.

What is going on??

We *have* been traveling a bit. In the last month, we were in Eugene (briefly), Bellevue (briefer), Kelso (briefest), and Portland (least brief). Oh, and the weekend before we went to Eugene, I went to Weston, OR with our church's high school girls.

Because of this, my purse has a serious case of Travel Bag.


A lesser person would be too proud to share with you the contents of this bag. It's a lot. Maybe it doesn't look like it. Maybe this looks like a nice, slender purse to you.

But let me tell you, when I dumped this puppy out, I decided I needed to put on an episode of Arrested Development, because I was going to be here for a bit.

(Not because the cleaning would take that long. No, it's the documenting that which was in my purse. Because it needs to be shared.)




Are you ready?

Sunglasses (x2)
Wallet
Makeup bag
Keys
Gum (x2)
Napkins (x3)
Ear Buds (x2)
Chapstick
Benefit High Beam illuminator
Loose change
Pet formula Rescue Remedy
Thumb Drive
Strand of Freshwater Pearls (which I bought at a craft store, lost in the car, and found a month or two later)
Beaded necklace
Simply Sara postcards (2)
Plain Jayne postcard (gently wrinkled)
Hair Salon Reminder Card (from December)
Doctor's Office Guidelines form, folded
1 oz bag of Annato Seed (purchased at The Spice and Tea Exchange)
Business card from The Spice and Tea Exchange
Seed packets (3)
Writing Implements (4)
Cap to Church Folding Chair
Mini Tube of Fekkai Glossing Cream (found on clearance!)
Expired Best Buy coupon
Baggy with six tylenol capsules
Baggy with smushed chocolate-covered cranberries
Rittersport chocolate in wrapper, opened and nearly empty.
Jo-Ann Fabrics mailing list form
Checkbook with very old address
Blotting papers, unused in case
Blotting papers, used and crumpled (2)
Gum wrappers (3)
Kiehls lotion sample (from the Kiehls store at The Grove)
Stale Trader Joe's fruit snack (with lint)
Hairpins (8)
Free iTunes song card from Starbucks
Empty Advil packets
Old Grocery Lists (2)
Receipts (24)

There it is.  Where to go from here?  Here are Kathi Lipp's instructions:



How to Clean Your Purse Instructions:

Here’s my super-speedy way of cleaning out my bag. I simply take my purse and dump it out into a plastic grocery bag. I sort the dump into Put Away, Put Back, and (in this case) Throw Away.



Put Away

Anything I want to keep that doesn’t belong in my purse gets put away. This is also when I go through receipts I’ve carefully placed in my wallet (or, more likely, the ones I’ve quickly thrown into my purse…) and random notes or other pieces of paper. If you’re away from home while you’re sorting, just put these items into another bag to put away when you get home. And when you get home, put them away in the right spot.



Put Back

If it belongs in your purse, go ahead and put it back into your purse.



Throw Away

Anything that’s left over in your plastic grocery bag (food wrappers, cash receipts you don’t care about, and so on,) is now garbage that gets recycled or thrown away.

The beauty of the grocery-bag organizing system is that you can do it anywhere, anytime. Just grab a grocery bag and start sorting while you’re waiting for your kids to get out of band practice or while you’re on the phone with your mom.



Clean it Up

Give your purse a good shake and get out any stray bits, crumbs etc. I’ve even used a hand held vacuum to really get the bag clean.



Label It and Put It Away

Assign a spot for everything that belongs in your purse, bag, or backpack. I use three zippered pouches. Everything goes into one of those three pouches or into your wallet (or in rare cases, onto your key chain). The fewer items you place in your purse, the easier it is to know what’s in there.



Wallet. I recommend you keep in your wallet only cash, receipts, checkbook, and credit, debit, and gift cards.



Pouch 1: Makeup bag

  • Lipstick and gloss

  • Eyeliner

  • Powder

  • Sunscreen stick

  • Blush and brush

  • Eyeglass cleaner wipes

  • Hand sanitizer

Pouch 2: Emergency kit

  • Fashion tape

  • $20

  • Needle and thread

  • Nail glue

  • Advil

  • Couple of adhesive bandages

Pouch 3: Change

Other Things to Keep in Your Bag

  • Sunglasses case

  • Cell phone

  • Keys

Keep It Up

If I sort through the items in my purse once a week, it really is easy to stay on top of it. It takes only a couple of minutes to keep it up.

How great is that? For more excellent tips for getting organized, check out Kathi's latest book, The Get Organized Project: 21 Steps to Less Mess and Stress, from Harvest House Publishers.

Dive in to your own purse! Kathi has a contest on her blog with prizes - pop over here to take a look!

The Publishing Process

$
0
0


This is basically entirely true. The only difference between this and real life is that sometimes the editor chooses alpacas over goats.

And I can't blame them.

(Many thanks to the lovely Emily Wierenga, for posting this on Sandra Bishops's wall for everyone to enjoy)

Spring Cleaning

$
0
0
Will be updating the blog's design and layout over the next few days. As I do it myself, this will take a bit. If things look wonky, just check back later :-)

Toodles!

-h

Madmen Recap: The Other Woman

$
0
0
I have many regrets.

The main one I've mourned is the fact that I didn't start writing recaps of Mad Men at the beginning of the season.

Honestly, it didn't occur to me at the time.  But after Sunday's episode (which I finally watched last night, since I was delayed by some delightful house guests), I've decided to go ahead and write about the episode anyway, even though we're well-past mid season. 

So here goes.


I love Mad Men. I love the writing, I love that almost every episode gives me plenty to chew on.  Episode 11, "The Other Woman," opened with a meeting between Kenny, Pete, and Herb, the owner of numerous Jaguar dealerships. Sterling Cooper Draper Price is angling the Jaguar account for reasons creative, professional, and fiscal. They need a car. They need momentum. The really, really need money.


The meeting is going well until Herb lets drop that he was quite taken by a certain redhead in the office, and that  an evening with her might cement SCDP's chances with the account. 

Kenny is horrified, skirting the proposition and trying to lure Herb in the direction of other, equally attractive redheads. Certainly, SCDP (And Sterling Cooper before it) has an expense account with which to hire dining companions, party girls, call girls, prostitutes, or what have you.  But that's fair, in Kenny's eyes, because that's what they do. That redhead Herb is referring to is Joan, who has a husband and a baby and much more power at the office than anyone really wants to recognize.

Pete, however, has hung his smarmy existence on winning Jaguar and promises to speak with Joan.  It's for the good of the company, he rationalizes to the other partners.  Surely, if offered enough money, Joan would take one for the team.

Pete approaches Joan in what Matt Zoller Seitz terms "a master class in passive-aggressive wheedling."  He compares her to Cleopatra. She blows him off, saying "you couldn't afford me."

While I think she meant for this to be belittling, Pete took this as a sign that she could be bought. This information is what he takes to an emergency partner's meeting.

Each partner's response is shaded by his own version of Joan. Don sees her as a disappointed wife and mother. Roger sees her as a respected former affair. Bert sees her as a key part of the company, and Lane as friend as well as a crush.

Don storms out, but the other partners agree that the offer could be made. Pete asks Lane to extend the company's line of credit, which he would probably do if he hadn't already for the purpose of embezzling company funds to cover up his British tax fiasco.

Rather than try to scrounge up $50,000, Lane covers his tracks by speaking to Joan himself. Instead of talking her out of taking the money, he proposes that a 5% partnership could set she and her son up for life.

Joan goes home to see that son - and her live-in mother. Joan's mother is more shrewish than usual. Last episode, Joan told Don that she had been "raised to be admired." Indeed, Gail Holloway seems to have mistaken Colette novels for Dr. Spock.


Conversely, you could make a strong argument that Eliza Doolittle is Peggy's literary doppelganger. After being plucked from the obscurity of secretary-hood and encouraged to return to work following the adoption of her's and Pete's out-of-wedlock son, Don Draper has played Henry Higgins to Peggy's Eliza, to the point where he's so accustomed to her face that he's willing to ignore her and treat her badly because he knows she'll take it.

But after lunch with Freddy Eynsford-Hill Rumsen, Peggy is convinced it's time to SCDP in general, Don in Particular. Yes, he's her professional security blanket. No, it's not doing her career any favors. After she wins back Chevalier Blanc Cologne over the phone and off the cuff, we see the Peggy we know, who can root through human nature to find the bit that she needs for an ad campaign. Rather than be impressed, Don gives the account back to Ginsberg and dismisses her rudely.

Peggy takes a meeting with Ted Chaough, a contemporary of Don's at a competing firm. Ted happily hires her on the spot, offering her more money and a better position than she had initially asked for (and she didn't ask - she jotted it down on a notepad which she slid across the table. Nice touch, Pegs). Is he that impressed with her work, or that excited to hire away Don's protege? I suspect a mixture of both, leaning towards the latter. If there's one lesson Peggy's learned the hard way is that a woman in the ad business is not setting herself up for respect. Is it really going to be that different at Cutler Gleason and Chaough? Are her coworkers going to be any more evolved than Stan or Harry or Pete?


And then there's Megan.

I don't get Megan. I thought I kinda got Megan, but then she started to make less and less sense. She left SCDP because it was too cynical. She left it for...acting? Because that's a feel-good profession.  And that whole bit with her and her dad in "At the Codfish Ball" where he chided her for not following her dreams, and we learn that those dreams included the stage.

Yes. I'm fairly certain most communism-leaning intellectuals wish more of their daughters would pursue the stage.

Add to the fact that she's made a good show of wanting a real, healthy-esque marriage with Don, but then she does things like throw him surprise parties and announce that if she gets a roll, she'll be in Boston for three months.

See ya, honey.

For a woman who has made it clear to her husband that she expects complete fidelity (in contrast to his previous marriage), leaving like that is like asking an alcoholic to a wine-tasting.  Just sayin'.

In a parallel sub-plot, we learn that Megan felt objectified by the casting director/writing gentlemen in her short but otherwise bland dress. Okay. There's something increasingly Becky Sharpish about Megan, her need for attention (Zou Bisou, anyone?) and the way she's using Don as a stepping-stool for the life she really wants.

But enough about Megan. We need to talk about Joan.

Joan makes an appointment with Pete. She tells him her terms are a 5% stake, non-silent partnership. He tries to bargain. She holds fast. He assures her the guy's not so bad.

When Don finds out, he races to Joan's apartment to tell her not to do it. Joan, wrapped in a green satin bathrobe, hears him out, cups his cheek, and tells him he's one of the good ones. Pete had neglected to mention that Don had been vehemently against the whole business.  Don assures Joan that their pitch can stand on its own.

As he gives that pitch, speaking eloquently about how Jaguars are the one object of beauty a man can truly own, the camera cuts back to Joan.

Joan, wearing the fur Roger gave her back when they were affair-ing, shows up at a door. Herb answers. He's gauche and awkward, saying that he feels like he, the sheikh, has Helen of Troy in his tent.

"Those are two different stories," Joan points out.

You hope that she'll walk away. But when he basically asks to get the show on the road, Joan's face is heartbreakingly resolute.

For years, Joan has been the subject of small prostitutions. Accepting presents as Roger Sterling's mistress. Wearing the red dress for holiday parties. Pouring drinks while hiking her hiney up just so. Charming clients. Trading a rape at the hands of her fiance for the marriage to a doctor, the life that she thought she wanted.

Considering her upbringing, it's impressive that Joan isn't the highest-paid call girl in Manhattan. But her job as office manager, where she sits in her office listening to people's problems a la Deanna Troi, still isn't enough.

Since being served divorce papers at the office, Joan knows she's off her game. She used to be modern and sexy, but now her clothes and hair are dated. She has a baby at home. She feels insecure at work.

Accepting Herb was another step down a familiar rabbit hole for Joan. The twist of the knife comes when we find that show-runner Matthew Weiner pulled a bit of timeline sleight of hand. Moments after Joan returns home from her night with Herb, we see the scene with Don.

He hadn't arrived in time.

Would it have changed her mind? Probably not. Joan is nothing if not practical. Being the office Geisha hasn't given her the job security she had in mind.

When she shows up for the next Partner's meeting, Don's face is a complex mixture of sadness, hurt, disgust, and respect. He hates it. He gets it.

Too hurt to celebrate winning Jaguar, Don retreats to his office. Peggy catches him, explaining in a carefully worded speech how much he has done for her, but it is time to move on.

In a scene that will remind every Mad Men viewer of the "Suitcase" episode, Don starts out playing it like she's angling for a raise. They he tries charm, followed by anger.

Finally he lands on reverent loss.  In a scene no one's forgetting anytime soon, he clutches Peggy's hand to his lips in a gesture of reverence, sorrow, and respect. They're both crying. Peggy tucks her hand away and walks away.


She gathers her things and walks down the office hallway. Everyone is celebrating the Jaguar win. Joan notices Peggy but doesn't pursue her. Peggy steps onto the elevator to The Kink's "You Really Got Me" with a small smile on her face.

Is she smiling because she's glad to move on? Smiling because she's finally gotten Don's attention?

I think both.

I hope she likes her flower shop.


Did you see the episode? What did you think? How did you respond?

You should watch Bunheads if...

$
0
0

1.) You loved Gilmore Girls.

2.) You have considered moving to Stars Hollow.

3.) You always wanted to see Emily Gilmore as a dance instructor.

4.) With flowy scarves.

5.) You ever wondered what the inside of Kirk's Mother's house looked like.

6.) You enjoy ballet.

7.) You enjoy wearing your hair in a bun.

8.) You HATED The Return of Jezebel James.

9.) You think more shows should be scored with Sam Phillips songs.

10.) You enjoy shows with dancing (SYTYCD, DWTS).

11.) You enjoy shows with quippy, smart, fast-paced dialogue, writers who love their characters, and good old-fashioned charm

I've got to be honest. When I first heard the title, I was like, Bunheads? Really? Hopefully that will change before it airs. And then it didn't. And then Kara explained to me that a Bunhead was a person with her hair in a bun, and that it had nothing to do with hotdog buns (sorry. I got confused.) And then I saw the series trailer, and I was like, Hey, it looks cute, but like watered-down Amy Sherman Palladino, and the guy looks kinda dopey. I mean, there's nothing wrong with him, but he's no Luke.




Really.

And then I watched a sneak peak of the pilot episode and was completely blown away by the show's awesomeness.

Yes, it's Gilmore Girls 2.0. Is that bad? No. If there's an author you like, you hope that their subsequent books will be in a similar vein. It's called brand, and it's a big deal. I heart show-runner Amy Sherman Palladino's brand, so I'm delighted that she has a new opportunity with a new show. Sutton Foster is great (the woman's got a Tony), Kelly Bishop is terrif, but I think the show's secret MVP will be Kaitlyn Jenkins, who plays Bettina "Boo" Jordan. She's all kinds of winning and adorable (purple dress below), and when Foster's character gets her to dance in front, she makes you want to dance with her.


There's a bit of a twist at the end of the episode (I say "bit" because it was an eventuality that I had thought about) which will open up all sorts of great plot/character opportunities. My biggest quibble with the episode is a monologue of Foster's that's framed awkwardly with no cutaway shots and feels long - but that's a directing/editing issue, really, rather than a writing issue.

The Pilot episode airs on ABC Family on June 11. You can still catch it early here, if you enter the password   
HollywoodLifeBunheads (if it expires, check the news section for the show on imdb and see if any other sites are promoting it). Or catch it on June 11.

Happy watching! If you see it, be sure to share your thoughts in the comments.

How Things Are

$
0
0
I started this post differently, exactly one week ago.

It was full of happy news and instagram photos and glad tidings of dogs. Instead, I get to write this one.

We're putting Tesla, our dog, to sleep tonight.  The fact of the matter is that, no matter how much we love her, exercise her, play with her, train her, and manage her, she's bitten me six times over the last nine months. She's gotten Danny three or so times.

Last week we "adopted" a second dog on a trial-run from the prison-training program, a dog purported to be excellent at dog calming signals. We hoped he'd help Tesla learn to self-calm so that we could do some BAT-training with her. They played well together - and he was a good dog - but the stress of the change sent Tesla into a crisis-mode that we couldn't ignore. If the weather hadn't been unseasonably cool and I hadn't been wearing jeans, she would have gotten my legs. Twice.

We returned the other dog. We considered keeping him, but he showed signs of becoming a resource-guarder, and to be honest, after working with an aggressive 30-lb dog for nine months, I was terrified at the potential of doing the same with a 75-lb dog. (Note: he was returned to the prison program, where he will be trained and interacted with until adoption. He's good.)

After a conversation with our trainer, we came to the conclusion that Tesla, as smart and athletic, cute and funny as she is, would never be safe around young children. 

Danny and I had preliminary hopes of finding a shelter that might be able to work with her, but the no-kill shelter in our area doesn't accept aggressive dogs. And realistically, her stress in any other situation would put anyone trying to work with her at risk. We made the excruciating decision to have her put to sleep.

I hate it. I hate failure. I look at her and see the puppy I stayed up with at all hours, socialized endlessly, and trained patiently. But the fact of the matter is that when she hit adolescence, all of her genetically-inherited tendencies kicked in. The dog who once basked in the joy of having her belly rubbed by multiple children at a family reunion, the dog who patiently allowed timid children to pet her at the park, now bares her teeth and growls at me if I give her a (requested) belly rub.

It breaks my heart. 

We got Tesla shortly after our move to Tri-Cities, after (as faithful readers of this blog know) a difficult series of months. The circumstances of that are a large reason why we fought so hard for her. We learned a lot. We learned that her brand of stress-reactivity is partly genetic, and partly imparted by the mother in-utero. Having seen her mother, we know this was the case. Our beloved puppy was a behavioral time bomb, but one who had the best life possible.

As much as we hurt for her as well as ourselves, I'm glad we're doing this now, before she seriously injures someone. We can remember her in as balanced a light as possible, rather than as "the dog who sent ____to the hospital." We're not doing this out of anger, or as punishment. She is so high-stress, despite our best efforts, that her quality of life is not what it should be. This way, we know exactly where she is, that she's not hungry, not frightened - and not frightening anyone else.

So that's what's going on around here. We are actively looking for a new puppy, and I'm desperately looking forward to having good news to post. Until then, if you have a dog (or cat, or bunny, or what-have-you), give it a pet for me and enjoy the moment. 

Life is short. Enjoy the good days.

One Week Later

$
0
0
Remember when I said I looked forward to posting good news?


This is Shiloh - our new Cavalier King Charles Spaniel! He's ten weeks old today, about six and a bit pounds of fluff and kibble. He loves to play, he loves to chew, and he LOVES to snuggle.



Danny and I drove to Seattle last Thursday; we were both, I'll admit, *just* hanging on. It felt good to get out of town, and the drive from here to Seattle is a pretty one.

After contacting several breeders, I found one in Silverdale with a litter ready to go and puppies still available. The breeders were vetted by our dog trainer, and when we went to see the puppies, we had lots of questions. Honestly, on the way there, we told ourselves we were just going to look, and maybe, possibly *consider* bringing home a puppy if it was, like, the perfect puppy.

Well..





We like him okay. And yes, he is a puppy, so there's plenty of work to be done with him, but he's doing well with house-training (it helps that he sniffs and/or circles 2-5 times before actually doing anything), and he's learning his "sit" and "lay down" cues quite well, and he does pretty great on a leash (once he stops chewing it). When he wakes up in the morning, he does so slowly, leaving plenty of time for snuggling and belly-rubs.

We still ache over Tesla. A new puppy means 20 different things that remind me of her puppyhood - which wasn't long ago - and having to figure out which items of hers to use over, and which ones not to. But Shiloh has been happy to accommodate us as a therapy puppy.

He's also ridiculously cute in his Martha Stewart collar and harness. Just saying.

Life is hopeful. Good things are on the horizon, and they are being met with a happy puppy tail-wag.

We really like the puppy. Did I mention the snuggling? 

Happy Anniversary, Us - Part V

$
0
0

Five years ago today, I married my best friend.

WHERE THE HECK DID THE TIME GO???



(For those of you reading and snickering, muttering, "wait till you give it twenty, thirty, forty years, baby puppy," I respectfully ask you to wait until those twenty, thirty, forty years have passed and I exclaim it again. Because it will be happen. And don't worry, you will be right.)

Seriously, this year zip-a-dee-doo-da'd by.  I was laying in bed this morning, thinking, "I should write our annual anniversary blog, but didn't I do that just recently?" If "recently" means "last year, dufus," then yes.

And what a year! Moving into our first house together. Heck, *building* our first house together (note to self: never again). Dealing with a difficult dog. Getting a new puppy. Traveling to Memphis and Missouri together. Lawn care. Making new friends. Grieving life's difficulties together. Celebrating successes together. enjoying small moments. Learning about each other. Taking clichéd walks on a beach. Enjoying clichéd sunset strolls. Come to think of it, we enjoy many clichés.

We argued yesterday. It happens. But the thing is - after we finish arguing, Danny is still the one that I want. I love his embrace. I love his sense of humor (he surprises people with how funny he is. He does not surprise me). I love how he falls asleep on the couch, still holding his book. I love how his hand seeks mine when we walk, even if it's just across the parking lot to Target.

I still get a giant kick out of tickling his feet.  It's true.

This is going to be a short blog, because it is out anniversary, and a rare one where we get to spend all of it together. We're going to go out and enjoy it.

Time, you know. It moves fast.

Absolutely Official, Very Important Publishing News!

$
0
0

Coming in May, 2014, I'll be releasing the first book of a brand new series, A Table By the Window from WaterBrook Publishing!

I seriously could not be more excited. My agent and I have been working toward this for a long, long time. The beginnings of the story popped into my head almost five years ago, shortly after I married Danny. As time passed, the story grew and changed, becoming richer and more complex.

Like cheese.

And after all of these years, the story has found the perfect home at WaterBrook.



Some questions answered:

Q: What are the new books about?

A: Here's a short synopsis:

"The youngest of five children, Juliette D'Alisa grew up in her parent's restaurant, D'Alisa & Elle. Rather than become a chef herself, she works for the Oregonian as a food writer. She likes food writing most of the time, but not so much that she won't consider her brother's offer to start a restaurant together. When her maternal grandmother passes away, Juliette inherits her pastry prep table. Inside the table, Juliette finds the clue to a potentially devastating family secret. While her career and family life are turned upside-down, Juliette decides now is not the time to try a romantic relationship. Whether she's looking or not, though, there is a flirtatious sous-chef and an insightful medical researcher who might just try to change her mind."

Q: Hey...Juliette sounds kind of like...

A: Gemma Di Rossi, from the Plain and Simple books? She's pretty much the same character with a different name. Her voice is slightly different in the new books, and she only has one very close friend when the first book opens (who may or may not sound a *lot* like Kim). But in my head, the series has always been about Gemma. Who is now Juliette...

Q: May of 2014? Why is it going to take so long?

A: Writing, editing, and marketing a good book takes time. Having it scheduled out that far means that there are a lot of people committed to putting the best book on the shelf - and making sure everyone knows about it.

Q: What made you want to write about restaurants and food?

A: After college, I interned for a food, wine, and travel magazine called Northwest Palate. I got introduced to a whole new perspective on food and found it fascinating. I discovered Ruth Reichl's memoirs, Tender at the Bone, Comfort me with Apples, and Garlic and Sapphires. Those experiences encouraged me to develop as a home cook and as a reader of good food writing.  

Q: How many books will be in the series?

A: Three - A Table by the Window, Reservations for Two, and Table for Two. Those are the working titles, and are subject to change. All three novels will focus on Juliette, her family, career, and love life.

Q: What genre would you consider the new books to be?

A: My agent and I call them "Women's Fiction with a Foodie Twist."

Q. Will you be writing any more Amish novels?

A. I don't plan to, no. I never set out to be an Amish fiction author. When I was first in talks with Harvest House, they asked if I would be willing to write an (singular) Amish novel. That turned into two, because we agreed that having the second book be a follow-up would be wise. Amish fiction, particularly at that time, was selling like crazy, and I agreed on the basis that this would not be a permanent "thing."

Please understand, I don't live near the Amish. I don't have Amish relatives. I read Beverly Lewis's books when I was in high school (Remember The Shunning?), but otherwise had no particular interest in that area. Both Jayne and Sara took a tremendous amount of research.

A quick spin around my Pinterest boards (or my blog, or my facebook page, or my house) will tell you that I am not about all things plain, simple, or homespun. It's just not my aesthetic. 

Do know, however, that I have a great deal of respect for many other Amish authors. Suzanne Woods Fisher is one of the nicest, sweetest people, like, ever. Leslie Gould is an absolute delight. Kate Lloyd is wonderful, and I was honored to be able to endorse her debut novel. There are plenty of other gifted Amish authors out there, and lots of books for my Amish fiction-loving readers to choose from.

Q: If I like Amish Fiction, will I like your new books?

A: You'll have to decide that for yourself, but if you liked Plain Jayne and Simply Sara, I think the answer is yes. The new books place a similarly high priority on faith, family, identity, and truth. The style is very similar, and my storytelling sensibilities haven't changed. You can expect parts that make you laugh and parts that might make you cry. Juliette's family dynamic is very My Big Fat Greek Wedding meets While You Were Sleeping, with a twist of Julie & Julia and a soupçon of A.S. Byatt's Possession. I think it's good stuff. But I'm also the author; it's my baby, I'm gonna say it's cute.

Q: Speaking of cute, how's the puppy?

A: Oh, you know. Adorable. Business as usual.


Q: Have you drawn more from your own life in the new books?

A: In a lot of ways, yes. Juliette gives online dating a try in the first book; that's how I met Danny, nearly six years ago. There's also my love of food and decorating in the new books - I'm very excited!

Q: So what should I do until the first book releases?

A: Check out the new Table by the Window board on Pinterest! New pins will be added often, and who knows? There may be clues :-)

Getting Started

$
0
0

Totally loving this line from Meg Cabot's blog:

"If you want a long-lasting publishing career, I think the best way to spend your tweens and teens and early twenties isn’t worrying about getting published, but figuring out who you are and what you’re good at, experimenting with your style, and developing your own voice—in other words, just live your life."

(full post here)

I love that. I love it because I think it's so true and so right.

I talk to a lot of people about getting started in writing, or the writing business. And yes, it's *totally* a business. But it's also the business of selling a (hopefully) really great product. I get frustrated when people talk to me about agents and proposals and the desire to go from concept to contract.

It doesn't work that way. And it shouldn't work that way - not if you're about telling the best story. Telling the story, telling it well - that comes first. Then you can worry about agents and marketing and publicists and paperwork. It will be there when you're done.



Some people start writing early - I did. Other people start writing later. When that's the case, I really think the wisest tack is to let yourself have a second adolescence from a creative standpoint. Figure out your identity as a writer. Identify your writing heroes. Settle into your voice. Learn the building blocks of story. Create compelling characters. Figure out what makes a compelling concept. Try different styles on for size and see what fits comfortably. Don't focus on achievement - focus on growth. Write drafts. Do the work for work's sake. Challenge yourself to be sharper, more edited, more precise, more thoughtful.

Like any other skill, writing well is something you learn how to do, and something you can get better at. Respect the craft.

If you respect the craft, then the agent/editor/sales/marketing/contract/query/subsidiary rights stuff will work itself out. Promise.

And in the meantime, you've lived life. You've observed humanity. You've been places - and that, my friends, is worth writing about.

Cupcake of the Summer

$
0
0
We all know by now that Carly Rae Jepsen's "Call Me Maybe" is the song of the summer.



But the cupake of the summer? Hands down, it's the S'mores Cupcake.


I started with Martha Stewart's recipe for our church's high school girl's retreat - I figured a s'mores-themed cupcake couldn't lose.




Martha's recipe, though, wanted you to make a ganache *and* a marshmallow frosting, the kind that requires a candy thermometer.

I have nothing against candy thermometers, I just don't have one yet. Also, I was making these cupcakes in the second-smallest kitchen I've ever cooked in (first being the one in our Tennessee hotel room, with two burners and only my mini-convection toaster oven to bake with). The experience was a kind of cupcake-boot-camp.

Anyway, I stream-lined the recipe. Sure, you could make a ganache. You could also just stick a square of Hershey's into the cupcake while it's warm, and rather than make a marshmallow frosting, top the cupcake with actual marshmallows.

The girls did not complain.

After making the cupcakes several times, I've gotten the technique and proportions down correctly.

First: two squares of Hershey's (and don't even think of going highbrow with the chocolate. If you want to evoke the iconic summer campfire experience, you need the original). More than two is too sweet. Not bad, but too sweet.

Second: the marshmallows. I tried puddles of marshmallow fluff, big marshmallows, little marshmallows, and combinations of the three. The best technique is to spoon marshmallow fluff into a quart-sized baggie, cut a *small* bit of the corner off, and pipe it over the cupcakes before sprinkling the mini-marshmallows on. Yes, you can do it with just the minis, but you'll drop a bunch on the floor and make a mess. The fluff gives them something to adhere to.

Third: The creme-brulee torch. Did I not mention the torch? You torch the marshmallows. I'm afraid of fire. And matches. And ovens. The creme brulee torch? Loads of fun. They're not very expensive, definitely on the list of kitchen toys to spring for if you're of the mind to do so. They're also good for browning the tops of casseroles if you can't get that one corner to toast right under the broiler, or caramelizing banana slices (more on that in another post).

And creme-brulee, I suppose.

Anyway, a quick back-and-forth motion on multiple cupcakes at a time seems to work the best. Blow out the flames periodically (make sure any loose hair is tied back).

Back to the cupcakes.

1 1/2 c. all-purpose flour
1 1/3 c. whole wheat pastry flour
2 tsp baking powder
1 1/2 tsp fine sea salt
1 1/2 tsp ground cinnamon

2 1/2 sticks unsalted butter, room temp
6 eggs
1/4 c. honey
2 c. brown sugar (I've used both light and dark)
2 tsp vanilla (extract or paste)

1 large package of Hershey's chocolate (the value pack is the best deal)
1 jar marshmallow fluff
Mini-marshmallows (approximately 1/2 to 3/4 of a bag, depending on how much you like them)

Heat oven to 350 degrees. Line muffin tines with cupcake liners. Mix the dry ingredients. Whip butter and sugar together in a mixer, add eggs one at a time. Add dry ingredients, mix until just blended. Spoon batter into gallon-sized freezer Ziplock bag. Cut a corner from the bag...


...and pipe batter into prepped cupcake tins.


I love this technique because it makes the whole process so much easier and neater. Your cupcakes will come out much more uniform, and when you're done, you can chuck the empty bag.

Bake until cupcakes are just done. Push chocolates into each cupcake; when cooler, pipe tops with marshmallow fluff and top with mini-marshmallows. Toast marshmallows with creme-brulee torch until you reach your desired level of toastiness (I like them pretty toasted. The burnt sugar flavor keeps the cupcakes from being too sweet, making it easier to eat them in greater quantity).

Enjoy!


Free Music for the Cheap and the Impoverished

$
0
0
Listening to music is one of those writing-essentials for me, and putting new music into the mix is a must. The Pandora ads drive me nuts (also: it's terribly distracting), so every once in a while I hunt for new free stuff on Amazon and come up with some good finds. Here are some of the best:



1. Yuna - Live Your Life

Gentle indie-pop, this track isn't my favorite on the very economical album (that would be "Remember My Name), but "Live Your Life" is a good introduction to this up-and-comer. She recently played a benefit concert at Anthropologie in Seattle. If Anthro gets behind her, she's one to watch.















2. James Vincent Morrow - We Don't Eat

Haunting and minimalist. Don't know who to compare this too, possibly because (as my mother reminded me) I was raised Amish. (In truth, there was a lot of music in our home. It just happened to be written and composed largely by Misters Bach, Mendelssohn, Beethoven, Gershwin, Berlin, Rogers, and Hammerstein.)













3. Christa Wells - You've Got a Home

I find a lot of CCM releases to be far too saccharine and samey, but Christa Wells is the real deal.  It's upbeat without making you want to smack your head on something.













4. Barnaby Bright - Gravity

If you like Over the Rhine or Hem, give Barnaby Bright a go. They've actually got several free tracks available on Amazon, but this one's my favorite.













6. Amy Stroup - Just You

If you enjoy Ingrid Michaelson, give Amy a listen. She's got another free track on Amazon, but this is my favorite.













7. Little & Ashley - Thousand Falling Stars

More upbeat but not so edgy as to be difficult to write to. Good to throw in the mix so you don't get sleepy.














8. Jesca Hoop - Born To

She's kind of Regina Spektor-esque. Also good to keep you from getting sleepy.














9. Allie Moss - Late Bloomer

Good buds with the aforementioned Ingrid Michaelson, they sound quite alike. Thoughtful indie-pop with some Cranberries-esque elements.














10. Allo, Darlin' - Capricornia

Sixties-flavored (or so I guess. See Amish-upbringing notes above), a nice track if you're a fan of The Weepies or Camera Obscura.

Those are my finds! What are your best cheap (and legal) music-finding tricks?
Viewing all 131 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images