Holy Holly
"You say hellraiser like it's a bad thing."
Nancy Miller, the creator of the TNT series, Saving Grace writes:
...Grace, that part of you that is fearless, that questions everything, that lives life unconditionally, gloriously, giving in to a freedom of expression so raw and primal that sometimes it leaves you breathless.
According to the website (same link as above):
SAVING GRACE stars Holly Hunter in an astonishing performance as Grace Hanadarko, a top-notch, forceful investigator whose wild personal life translates into a no-holds-barred approach to her detective work......Grace's mesmerizing journey involves facing both the internal and external demons that stand in her way.
I have never been a fan of Holly Hunter because most of the time I couldn't understand what she was saying. But either my ears and tv reception have improved, or Hunter has had some elocution lessons between last season and this one. I gave up watching it last summer. Now, I'm addicted to it.
You go, girl!
Embrace Your Grace
You can watch full episodes by going here.
it's still the wrong answer
Thanks to Jim Culleny for his daily poetry emails.
Myth
Muriel Rukeyser
Long afterward, Oedipus, old and blinded, walked the roads. He smelled a familiar smell. It was the Sphinx. Oedipus said, "I want to ask one question. Why didn't I recognize my mother?"
"You gave the wrong answer," said the Sphinx. "But that was what made everything possible," said Oedipus. "No," she said. "When I asked, What walks on four legs in the morning, two at noon, and three in the evening, you answered, Man. You didn't say anything about woman."
"When you say Man," said Oedipus, "you include women too. Everyone knows that."
She said, "That's what you think."
Rachel Rachel
Nope, not Rachel Ray. She's sort of the antithesis of the Rachel who has really impressed me recently.
Rachel Maddow, who has her own program on Air America, and has been on MSNBC's Countdown as a political analyst, recently has stood in for usual host, Keith Olbermann (who, by the way is the one man with whom I'd like to be stranded on a deserted island.)
Maddow has the presence and the personality of a true news media star. She's brilliant, articulate, appealing, confident, and down-to-earth. She's also openly gay, and the way she presents herself visually reflects that fact in a very professional way. She has developed her own female -- but not particularly feminine -- style, and it works.
I suppose, if I had to be stranded on a deserted island with a lesbian, I'd just as soon it be Rachel Maddow.
Myrln Monday (2)
Myrln is gone, but his spirit remains with us in the power of his words:
Fathers and Daughters
Little girls are nice,
but we do them wrong
fussing with their hair and dressing them up
like dolls –
teaching them from the start
they are decorative playthings.
Better we should feed them
words and numbers and tools
to remind them
that before women, they are people.
Teach them love and caring and nurture, yes,
but not as the entirety of their being,
else those qualities
become walls and prisons.
Give them, as well, wings
and teach them to fly –
in case later in life
someone builds walls around them.
Little girls are nice,
but daughters who are their soaring selves
are better.
Fathers and Sons
All the time they’re growing up,
sons try hard to please their fathers.
They play ball, follow dad’s interest in cars,
or in building things,
or in fishing –
whatever it is that pleases dad.
Mostly learning how to be a man.
If they’re lucky,
they’re not required to embrace any of those
for a lifetime.
If they’re lucky,
somewhere along the way,
they’re let loose
to strike out after their own interests
and to please themselves.
And fathers,
if they’re smart,
realize that somewhere along the way
is a turning point:
a time when sons become teachers,
and fathers can learn
what their sons became on their own,
how manhood is not a fixed concept.
And say to their sons,
“Good job.”
Then both will know
they did right
in pleasing each other.
William A. Frankonis, 1937 - 2008
Hillary be damned
I think that Hillary Clinton would be damned by public opinion no matter how she ran her campaign. If she had Barack's eloquence, charm, and public persona, she would have been damned for being to theatrical, too smooth, not tough enough etc. etc. Oh yes, she's made too many mistakes in her campaign, but I don't think that's the reason there's so much animosity toward her.
Many American's love the idea of good vs. evil, the bad vs. the good, and they've been handed a perfect opportunity to set up a METAPHORICAL (not racial) black vs. white battle. No grays here (except creeping in on Hillary's battered head.)
And, despite all of the backlash against Ferraro, I believe that if a white male with Barack's change agenda AND LACK OF EXPERIENCE were running, he wouldn't have made it this far.
Oh, wait a minute. A white male with Barack's change agenda AND CONSIDERABLE EXPERIENCE was running and didn't make it.
Perhaps what it all just means is the time is right for someone like Barack -- a moving, persuasive orator, a symbol of radical change from the status quo (symbolized by his bi-racial ethnicity), someone from a new generation who appeals to the new generation. If he could be canonized by us liberals, he would be called Saint Barack, patron saint of idealists.
So often, timing is everything. And, as we saw on Ellen, Barack's got the timing down pat.
And late middle-aged, thick waisted, experienced, tough broad Hillary be damned.
But not by me.
our president, ourselves
I have not been a supporter of the Hillary Clinton campaign, but I was given a good smack on the head by an article by Robin Morgan, which, among other things, makes this point:
So why should all women not be as justly proud of our womanhood and the centuries, even millennia, of struggle that got us this far, as black Americans, women and men, are justly proud of their struggles?
Morgan pointedly criticizes this campaign...
... where he has to pass as white (which whites—especially wealthy ones—adore), while she has to pass as male (which both men and women demanded of her, and then found unforgivable). If she were black or he were female we wouldn’t be having such problems, and I for one would be in heaven. But at present such a candidate wouldn’t stand a chance—even if she shared Condi Rice’s Bush-defending politics.
.
And she reminds me of why I am a devoted feminist:
Women have endured sex/race/ethnic/religious hatred, rape and battery, invasion of spirit and flesh, forced pregnancy; being the majority of the poor, the illiterate, the disabled, of refugees, caregivers, the HIV/AIDS afflicted, the powerless. We have survived invisibility, ridicule, religious fundamentalisms, polygamy, teargas, forced feedings, jails, asylums, sati, purdah, female genital mutilation, witch burnings, stonings, and attempted gynocides. We have tried reason, persuasion, reassurances, and being extra-qualified, only to learn it never was about qualifications after all. We know that at this historical moment women experience the world differently from men—though not all the same as one another—and can govern differently, from Elizabeth Tudor to Michele Bachelet and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf.
Morgan's lengthy piece brings the issue of electing Hillary Clinton into focus.
Hillary said she found her own voice in New Hampshire. There’s not a woman alive who, if she’s honest, doesn’t recognize what she means. Then HRC got drowned out by campaign experts, Bill, and media’s obsession with everything Bill.
And she ends with:
Me? I support Hillary Rodham because she’s the best qualified of all candidates running in both parties. I support her because her progressive politics are as strong as her proven ability to withstand what will be a massive right-wing assault in the general election. I support her because she knows how to get us out of Iraq. I support her because she’s refreshingly thoughtful, and I’m bloodied from eight years of a jolly “uniter” with ejaculatory politics. I needn’t agree with her on every point. I agree with the 97 percent of her positions that are identical with Obama’s—and the few where hers are both more practical and to the left of his (like health care). I support her because she’s already smashed the first-lady stereotype and made history as a fine senator, because I believe she will continue to make history not only as the first US woman president, but as a great US president.
As for the “woman thing”?
Me, I’m voting for Hillary not because she’s a woman—but because I am.
The above excerpts can't really capture the force and fury of Morgan's article. Go and read the whole thing here.
