Some Really Obvious Things.

1. I watched the movie Babies today. I loved it. Babies are so cute! At first they can't do anything except just lie there and be squishy, but then they learn how to do things! And when they mess up it's adorable because they're little! I never get tired of babies.

2. It's getting colder! I think fall is coming! Fall is usually really fun, because I love the first day of school, but since I'm not in school right now mostly fall is just cold. My birthday is happening soon, but mostly that just indicates that after I turn 26 it's going to be cold all the time for a long time. I just really hate being cold!

3. Know what I like to read? Books. Especially the Classics. So timeless! You should definitely check them out.

4. Sufjan Stevens is a great singer. I know, he has a funny name, but hear me out! He is generally categorized as an "independent" or "indie" songwriter. Some people argue that indie music is superior to commercial music because it's more "real."*

5. A good food to eat is pasta, maybe with sauce. If you want to get crazy maybe you should try TOMATO sauce. Whoa. Now that's a good combo.

6. I'm pretty excited about my interview for grad school! I was worried I wasn't going to get one, which would have meant that I was the bottom quarter of all the applicants. That wouldn't make me feel good. However, my being chosen only means that as an interviewee I am in the top 75%, which isn't that comforting either. What if I am not in the top 25%, or even the top 50%? It feels good to be chosen for things you want to do. Accordingly, I will be sad if I do not get chosen.

7. I can't wait to get some student loans so I won't be so worried about money! It's great to get money from the government. It sucks that you have to pay it back, though!

*I am not one of those people.

"As strong as our faith is, with all the mixed messages attacking it, it can also become very fragile."

--Bishop Richard C. Edgely.

On Saturday, I road-tripped down to Portland with the lovely Erin. We were there for less than a day but were able to squeeze in eating Lebanese food, buying terrible movies at Deseret Book and being with the equally lovely Cassie as she went through the Temple for the first time.* It was, of course, unspeakably lovely, albeit a trifle whirlwind. But that's how I like to roll.

Erin and I were discussing some of the frustrations of life in a singles ward during the loooooong drive back, seeing as it was so rainy one could not drive at an acceptable speed. Whilst we were talking, ELC said something that stuck with me.

She said, "Some people come to church for external reasons."

The conversation went on from there, but I kept thinking about that sentence the next day during Sacrament Meeting.

I am not sure if everyone goes through this process like I do, but I have to talk myself out of leaving the Church on a fairly regular basis. It almost became a joke between me and some of my friends at BYU. "Hey, Wills, what are you doing later? Well, after you have dinner at your grandma's, would you mind talking me out of leaving the Church? Thanks, I appreciate it. Bye."

I have written before about my many intellectual struggles with the Church, which have only been made worse by my serving a mission (hilarious). Conversely, the more I struggle, the more I realize that if I leave the Church, it would all be for nothing. Well, not for nothing, but if I really wanted to leave, I would have done it already, right?

The fact is, I don't want to. And hopefully, because I don't want to, I never will.

Here's where the external vs. internal binary helped me out so much.

So, lots of people my age go to church for social reasons, to make their family happy, to find people to date, to have local support system, to have someone to go to for help when you move, etc. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, but it does kind of miss the point of worshipping Jesus Christ and serving others and all that idealistic Bible business. Those would be external motivators to be involved with the Church. They aren't bad, just motivated by things other than your own thoughts and feelings.

Internal motivators, on the other hand, would be introspective things like a love of God, a desire to improve, etc. Obviously, hypocrisy plays a role here as well, because some people go to Church with the goal of seeming pious when in fact they do whatever they want when no one's watching. That's more obnoxious than the kids who come to Church looking for friendly times. Thus, it is possible to have a seemingly internal motivator actually be an external one. But generally, I hope you get what I'm saying.

Here's the thing. I have NO external motivation to go to Church. I'm not crazy about most of the people there, bless their hearts. I would have a perfectly viable (and less arbitrary) social circle if I hung out with people I actually had things in common with besides belonging to the same church. My family doesn't care one bit whether or not I'm Mormon, in fact many of them would probably be delighted if I cut loose with them once in a while instead of being a Mormon stick-in-the-mud.**

In fact, most of the reasons I have for wanting to leave the Church are external ones. Get it? It's not like I don't believe in God or struggle with the possibility that the Church isn't true. When I want to leave the Church, it's because I feel so fed-up with some embarrassing policy or some obnoxious people that I feel like saying I GIVE UP. Jesus shouldn't have to put up with this crap and neither should I.

But the trouble is, He does. The trouble is, it's still true.

My reasons for leaving are external, but the things that keep me from doing so are all internal. I believe in God. I love the Book of Mormon. I love the Temple. These people are crazy, but most of them mean well. Abandoning my internal motivations for external reasons is just as immoral as doing things for external reasons when no internal motivation exists.***

Additionally, the things that I love the most about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are some of the most internally focused. Take family history work. If the doctrine about eternal families isn't true, do I gain anything from doing it? Nope. Don't make any friends or meet any hotties at the Fam. Hist. Library, I can promise you that.

Ditto with the temple. If this is all a gigantic hoax, no one has been hurt by the things we've done in the Temple. But no one has really been helped, either. Either these things mean nothing, or they mean EVERYTHING. Those are the things that I feel the strongest attraction to.

Here's to doing things because they're right, and not because anybody cares except God, assuming He exists.

I feel that He does.

I'm not giving up yet.

*Erin was actually going through the temple with a separate friend at a different time. But saying it up there would have messed up the narrative.

**Except then who would be the Designated Driver?

***Which isn't ALWAYS immoral. But that's a post for another day.

A memo I missed and another I didn't.

I won't try to pretend that I was a tomboy when I was little. I did climb trees and collect bugs, but I also played with dolls until I was in fifth or sixth grade (but secretly). I never was much one for sports or roughhousing. However, I completely MISSED the whole Princess thing that most girls supposedly go through at some point. Do you think it's an exaggeration to say that most girls have a princess phase?

I never played with make-up or pretended to be a princess. I never had a Disney Princess costume or insisted on pink everything or screamed at my mother, "MY REAL MOM'S A PRINCESS!"

OK, I did once. But it was in jest.

I think the whole princess trend which is manifesting itself in very strange ways is finally starting to ebb. I hope so. It doesn't seem like the catalyst for healthy thought patterns in little girls. I'm glad I missed it.

However, lest you think it's an urban myth, I have several distinct memories of looking at my various Barbie dolls and feeling sad that I didn't look like them. How messed up is that?

In sum: American culture screws up little girls in a vast myriad of ways.

Check out the rest of this series here or the other work of Dina Goldstein here. Genius.

SO MANY 2010 BOOKS

In honor of Banned Books Week,which just wrapped up on Friday, please read one of the books on this list. Seriously, it has something for everyone.

And now, more of the books I have read this year.

It's Superman! by Tom Dehaven

I found this completely by accident whilst browsing at the library (Shut up, I'm awesome). I didn't think to check the copyright until I was finished (2005?), but it clearly owes at least some debt to the television shows Smallville and more importantly Lois and Clark: the New Adventures of Superman--the other Superman origin stories. It basically tells the backstories of Lois Lane, Lex Luther and Clark Kent, via a non-comic book character named Willie, who interacts with all of them and sort of ties the story together. The writing was brisk and exciting, and the characters were a really great mix of overall believable (despite the fact that Superman is often seen as one of the more "flat" superheroes) and historically accurate (Dehaven chose to set the book in the 1930s). Also, didn't we all secretly hope that Clark Kent had spent a few years as a train-hopping hobo during the Depression? I know I did.

Magic Trixie by Jill Thompson

I bought this at Golden Age Collectables pretty much on a whim. At the register, the extra-geeky female cashier in a witch hat got really excited and said "Oh! I love these books! I bought the entire series for my niece!"

I wasn't quite sure what to expect from a graphic novel aimed at very young children, but I absolutely loved it. Magic Trixie is a young witch from a family of witches who goes to a Hogwarts-esque school, where her classmates are a werewolf, a zombie (but a very CUTE zombie), a mummy, and a vampire. It's a credit to Thompson's skill as an illustrator that all of the characters are totally adorable, but not in an overtly Disney-ish way.

This first book in the series is about Magic Trixie's angst about her brand new baby sister, and her feeling like she is always either too big or too little to do something. It has a charming, kinda moralizing ending (but hopefully not so moralizing that kids would see through it ... I don't think they would, at least). Yay for families, basically. I plan to buy the rest for my future children.

Fun House by Alison Bechdel

This is another one of those books that I loved and identified with so much that I'm worried I won't be able to do it justice. Bob recommended this book to me and I bought it the last time I was in Pike Place (and thus Golden Age Collectables). I read it in a day and a half. It was that gripping. The story follows Alison through her childhood in a small town with her distant, abusive father, who later turns out have spent her childhood having affairs with men. Some of them were his students from the school where he worked as a high school teacher. Compounding her confusion is her realization as an adult that she is gay. It's a really depressing premise (at least the pedophile dad part), obviously, but her voice is so heartfelt and humorous and honest that I didn't find the book depressing at all. On the contrary, it was incredibly refreshing to know that lots of other adults are sometimes ambivalent and conflicted about some of the most important adults in their lives (I know I am). It made me want to write my own memoirs ... after my parents are dead, of course.

Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark by Alvin Schwartz

Remember the Banned Books list I referenced earlier? This book and the other books in this series are NUMBER ONE one the list of most banned/challenged books in the United States. Number. One. Banned more often than The Color Purple, or Sex by Madonna, or Heather Has Two Mommies (all of which are also on the list, naturally). I had heard of these books when I was a kid, but never read them myself. I do remember that they were very,very popular. Considering their placement on the list, I expected this book to be shocking, or at least inappropriate for young children.

I was wrong. The truth is, people are idiots.

So this book is indeed a collection of scary stories, but what you don't realize unless you actually READ the book is that the book is a collection of folk tales from around the world that Schwartz has collected in his years as a folklorist. Most of the stories are familiar from movies or TV shows or camping trips, and none of them are too mature for children. American folklore, is of course often known as Urban Legend, and some of the stories are about scary things like escaped convicts or supernatural things like ghosts, but the point remains the same: these are creepy stories that everyone knows of, but have never been traced to any real source. They are not out to harm anyone, and they are not too scary for kids. If you're old enough to want to read a book of scary stories, you are old enough to read it, and then deal with being a little scared. That's part of life. This book ought to have been titled "Intro to Folklore for Kids." I would wager that most kids find these stories to be harmless fun, not a gateway to a lifetime of witchcraft, or whatever it is parents are afraid of.

Also, the academic footnotes about the origins of the stories and how Schwartz researched them is totally fascinating.

Unauthorized X-Men by Len Wein, ed.

Yup, another collection of comic book essays. Shut up! I'm awesome!

This was an interesting book, and I was really excited to dig into it, because X-Men is one of my favorite franchises. I have always loved anything about misfits, for obvious reasons. Anyway, some of the essays in this were really great, but some of them were not as strong ... the connection of some essays' subjects to X-Men or its related issues felt like kind of a stretch. I still feel that Webslinger was a stronger collection overall. That said, I really enjoyed the articles about Jean Grey and feminism, as well as some of the articles about the science of mutation (although one of the Neofuturist pieces left a really bad taste in my mouth).

Becoming Jane Eyre by Sheila Kohler

I found this book also just through some un-organized library browsing. I checked it out because 1. Her last name is Kohler, which is similar to mine, and 2. Jane Eyre is one of my favorite novels, and perhaps the only 19th century novel I have actually enjoyed. I have started each of Jane Austen's books at some point in my life, but never finished any of them. Anyway, I wasn't sure if I was going to like this book or not, but I ended up liking it. Not loving it, but liking it.

The book was a little slow, but so was 19th century life, I suppose. Kohler follows the lives of the three Bronte sisters, who were all spinsters and writers and, as you all know, tough as hell. I don't know how exhaustive her research was, but the book felt pretty authentic. Also I really pity Charlotte's multiple encounters with unrequited love. Poor, plain, penniless babe. Like I said, it was slow as molasses, and the writing was just OK, so that's what the book was ... OK.

You can definitely read this if you want. I won't stop you.

Scott Pilgrim's Precious Little Life by Bryan Lee O'Malley

AKA the most Irish author name in recent memory.

I think a lot of people have made the mistake of checking out Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World (which is vol. 2 in this series) at their local library because they assumed that the movie is based on that book rather than on the whole series. Incorrect! I do not know this from experience.

This is a great, fast read. The pictures are really fun, as well. I don't know what else to say about it except that it's just as good, if not better, than the movie, and the movie was pretty damn good. If you've ever lived in a basement apartment or dated someone you weren't that into, you will relate to this book. Also, if you've ever bought something you didn't need as an excuse to see a someone you had a crush on (for me, it was a floppy disk ... in 2005).

Finding Serenity: Anti-heroes, Lost Shepherds and Space Hookers in Joss Whedon's Firefly by Jane Espenson, ed.

Yeah, another fan book, mounting evidence of my incurable geekdom. Shut up. I like myself.

I loved this book enough to want to buy it. Which is a big deal because I don't often find a book I like enough to want to read multiple times. Once through is good enough for most. But not this book. The more I learn about how awesome this show was, the sadder I get that it was cancelled after one season.

One of the articles in this book taught me about what kind of marriage I want to have someday (Uh, hi, Wash and Zoe? Perfect marriage). Another taught me that strong woman are neither surprised nor threatened by their own sexuality (I love you Joss Whedon, you crazyfeministman). If you enjoy this show, this book will change your life. Bonus: CHINESE GLOSSARY IN THE BACK.

The Jane Austen Book Club by Karen Joy Fowler

So I mentioned earlier in this very blog entry that I don't like Jane Austen, but I REALLY REALLY WANT to like Jane Austen. I've tried reading her books and I just can't. Get. Into them. I don't know if it's some sort of chemical imbalance in my brain or what. But it makes me sad.

I really did love the movie that is based on this book, though. I was surprised to find out it was a book, and again surprised at how much I enjoyed it. A nice beach book, even though I read it in my bed.

The movie aligns with the plot of the book with these slightly disturbing exceptions: 1. in the book, everyone is ten years older than they were portrayed in the movie, 2. Prudie's affair with her student was completely fabricated for the film--in the book, she has a happy, albeit occasionally boring, marriage and finally 3. the ending of the movie was pretty much a "happily ever after" deal, but the book's ending was much more ambiguous. People got back together even when it maybe wasn't the best thing, some people had unsatisfying aspects of their life that never got resolved. I liked that, though. Life is messy. Things don't always get resolved. It felt very honest. Very ... not Jane Austen.

CRUSHEZ

Remember when I was like sorry guys, I post way too many videos, and I promise I'm going to start posting more things of value?

Forget that. How can I stop posting when such videos exist, videos of Joseph Gordon-Levitt looking so handsome and covering Lady Gaga AND Aretha Franklin?

I could never withhold such videos from the people I love.

Make my day.

I love film. I also love movies. I love both, but I have a hard time with film festivals. I love to see new, creative film projects that often deserve more accolades than they ever receive, but I hate having to navigate my way through all of the terrible pieces of filth that they show at film festivals. And it's not because I'm a prude, because if you know me you know I'm not. However, I have noticed that a lot of independent filmmakers seem to think that in order to stand out in such a competitive industry, they have to include gratuitous violence, maybe because gratuitous violence sticks in people's memories? I don't know if that's why they do it, but I do know that it bothers me.

At Bumbershoot on Monday, Cassie and I attended two short film festivals: one intended for families, the other featuring short film by local filmmakers that were intended for adults. At the latter event, the final of the four films was honestly one of the most disturbing short films I have ever seen, and I am pretty open when it comes to what films I will try (I don't avoid films because they have a certain rating, for example). I think maybe the violence was supposed to be funny (It featured an old man getting shot in the eye, a pregnant woman getting shot in the stomach, and three other people getting shot in equally gruesome places) but it made me sick to my stomach. I don't understand why someone would feel inspired to make a film like that. It didn't make any point about violence or crime, it didn't make me think, all it did was make me sad. Like The Jungle in short film form, although that was created with a purpose in mind, so perhaps that's a poor analogy.

I know I must sound very puritanical and uppity right now, but it's film like the one we saw that make me not want to go to film festivals. You just never know when you'll wind up watching violence that's pretty much pornographic--created with no purpose beyond hitting you in the stomach.

That being said, the family film festival had several really charming pieces of film that I am sharing with you now. One is embed-able (?) the other is not. But please watch both of them because they are well-done and deserve whatever attention my measly blog readership would garner them.

This one is really funny, reminds me of something Pixar would do.

Click here to watch the other, which is simple and adorable and just really great.

Did these films just make your day? I'll bet they did.

A rather macabre thought process.

Today I listened to a How Stuff Works podcast entitled "How Cremation Works." A bit of a morbid topic, especially for a girl at a desk so far from the windows, but fascinating nonetheless. Also, keep in mind that I am very weird and intensely curious about everything. So, there you go.

Here are some interesting things one can do with your ashes:

1. Put them in a fireworks display. Pros: pretty awesome, and Hunter S. Thompson did it, and he is awesome. Cons: I am terrified of fireworks, so it would be kind of pointless (or maybe just too ironic?).

2. Have them crushed into a synthetic diamond. Pros: Wearable, inheritable. Cons: Until the Resurrection.

3. Have them mixed with ink or paint and made into a comic book or painting. Pros: It has the word "comic book" in it. Cons: What if the painting sucks? And of course you wouldn't want it to be a painting of YOU. That's just obnoxious.

4. Have them sent into space. Pros: Maybe your ashes would travel to an alien planet and they would be able to learn about humans or even bring you back to life! Cons: What if you just got a satellite all dusty?

This one is my most favorite of all:

5. There was this guy, an adventuring kind of guy who was there when they discovered the Titanic, who, when he died, told his family members and friends to take a teaspoon of his ashes with them whenever they travelled and scatter it somewhere cool. Pros: that is pretty much amazing. It's symbolic of your love for travel and adventure. It's a way for your loved ones to stay connected to you in a way that isn't too creepy (I guess it's a little creepy, but I think the awesome factor outweighs the creep factor). PLUS, when you get resurrected, the ashes will gather from ALL OVER THE WORLD like a superhero from a comic book. I just really like this idea so much.

I think I need to write a will, just in case.