Proposal for Public Service Requirement for Office of US President

in ,

Most of us know the basic requirements for candidates of the office of US President, including the minimum age of thirty-five, US residency for at least fourteen years, and natural-born US citizenship. However, in my opinion, these requirements are not sufficient. After the disastrous Presidency of Donald Trump, a malignant narcissist who couldn’t care less about the fate of our country unless it benefited him, I propose adding a new requirement to the minimum qualifications for this esteemed office.

Forget about the natural-born citizen requirement; any person who has been a naturalized citizen of the U.S. for at least thirty-five (or forty) years, in my opinion, should be allowed to run for President. But in addition, we should instate a new requirement: All US Presidential candidates must have served for at least a year, preferably more, in a public servant role: working for a non-profit or charity, serving in a local or federal Government office or a branch of the military, volunteering in organizations such as Peace Corps or Teach America, etc. This requirement would effectively eliminate opportunists and narcissists like Donald Trump from running and seizing the reins of our country for their own personal gain.

And in case such an opportunist decided to trump up a fake foundation as his or her example of public service (e.g. Trump Foundation) with dubious goals and inner-workings, the organization would first have to be independently “cleared” as a legitimate, bona-fide charity or non-profit, established and managed by someone other than the candidate, with a minimum five year history and a clear mission statement to help disadvantaged people.

Public officials who have served in local or federal government for at least a year would qualify to run for President, as would anyone who had served in any branch of the military or who had worked for a volunteer organization such as the Food Bank, Peace Corps, and so on. The point is that this candidate would need to demonstrate a commitment to helping others besides himself, his family, and his cronies. As a result, Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, George Bush Senior and Junior, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Ronald Reagan would all qualify as Presidential candidates. Donald Trump, however, would not.

If we add this requirement to the list of US Presidential candidate qualifications, we might not have to be as concerned that another con artist could usurp our country and wreak immeasurable havoc on our democracy.

Alexa, Are You Listening?

in

Yesterday we received an Amazon package - another small, nondescript brown Prime box, much like any other, addressed to my husband, no return address. This in itself wasn’t surprising. Since the Pandemic, we’ve tended to exploit our Amazon Prime free-shipping privileges to buy a lot of online supplies, thereby avoiding in-person shopping. For better or worse, especially with the holidays, our Amazon purchases have increased.

But this box did not turn out to be another order of Fancy Feast cat food, hair glop, or batteries. It was an Amazon Echo Show 5 Smart Display Home device, retailing for $89 (now $44, with prices slashed since Christmas). My husband had not ordered the device, nor had I. For that matter, it contained no gift receipt or message. Now, we already have two Echo Dot devices in our home, which we use frequently, by commanding “Alexa” to play songs of our choosing from AWS. Additionally, we have four Sonos speakers, two of which have Alexa voice activation, which we also use for playing music.

An engineer by trade and natural technophile, my husband eagerly unwrapped the device and plugged it in. Surprisingly, the device showed registration to a “Megan Andersen,” whom neither of us has heard of before. My husband entered his own name instead and continued with the device setup - e.g. American English, EST timezone, location, etc. We then watched in fascination as the device circled through a buffet of choices on its display, inviting us to request the weather forecast, listen to a story about California extending its pandemic restrictions, use the voice of Samuel L. Jackson, watch a video from Panama, etc. Reasoning that we don’t have much need for the device, since we already have two Echo Dots and four Sonos speakers, my husband suggested we might use it for its clock display - maybe as an alarm clock that would wake us each morning to NPR’s Morning Edition.

However, as we ran through the list of people who might have sent it to us, even texting a couple of them, who confirmed they weren’t the senders, we began to feel a little uneasy. When I noticed the display also included a video camera, we decided to turn off the camera and ultimately unplug the device. Finally, my husband “chatted” online with Amazon Customer Service, who claimed that the device was a gift from someone, placed on December 17th, but due to confidentiality reasons, they couldn’t identify the sender. They assured my husband they would email the sender, asking him or her to contact us, so we could thank him/her for the gift. Meanwhile, he searched his Amazon order history to confirm the device hadn’t been ordered from his account.

Ten or fifteen minutes later, my husband received an email from Amazon Customer Service, beginning “Dear Megan..” It went on to request that the mysterious Megan identify herself to us so we could properly thank her for the gift. Then my husband received another email from Amazon Customer Service, this one addressed to him, indicating that the sender had been contacted via email. As if that wasn’t strange enough… I immediately wondered why the first email had gone to my husband. He assumed he had been copied on the email, but if Amazon wanted to protect the person’s privacy, why had he been copied on an email that identified the sender’s first name?

He returned to the “chat session” with Amazon Customer Service, asking if the sender was indeed one Megan Andersen and asking Amazon to name the city from which the gift was ordered/placed. Amazon Customer Service confirmed that the sender was Megan Andersen (a pseudonym, we wondered?), but again, due to confidentiality reasons, would not name the sender’s location. They also offered to return the gift and give us a credit of $5 for our “inconvenience.”

Separately, my husband trolled linkedIn and Facebook for anyone with the name of Megan Andersen or first name Megan he might know, and came up short. In parallel, I used voice activation to request Alexa to provide our notifications, just to check if this package was on the radar as one of our orders (it wasn’t). But to my great surprise, Alexa added, for the first time ever, “I don’t recognize your voice. What is your name?” (I didn’t reply).

After running through the possible scenarios of who this mysterious person could be, how they obtained our name and address, and why they would send us something, I thought of one plausible explanation: The sender was Amazon. A case of truth stranger than fiction? Disclaimer: Yes, I’m a fiction writer, but I dabble in historical and contemporary fiction, not sci-fi, dystopian literature, mystery, or fantasy. In my mind, this explanation clicked. First, that would explain why the email account associated with the mysterious sender was my husband’s own email address and therefore why he received the email addressed, “Dear Megan.” Second, it would explain why Amazon Customer Service (who I’m sure knew nothing of what had truly happened) was nonetheless authorized to offer us a credit for our inconvenience. (For receiving an unwanted gift? Really?)

Most importantly, it would fit Amazon’s crafty, somewhat unscrupulous business style and practices. Using Big Data analytics, they could target Amazon Prime customers who do a lot of online shopping via Amazon, and own Echo Dots (but not the Smart display model). By sending the device the week before Christmas, they could masquerade it as a Christmas gift, hoping the recipient would simply “accept the gift horse without looking it in the mouth.” Now, why would they do this? I can think of a few reasons:

  • Collect tons of marketing data about select Amazon users’ habits, specifically in communicating with the smart display model - perhaps encouraging them to become further entrenched in the Amazon eco-system

  • Write off (hundreds? thousands?) of these Echo models (Echo Show 5), which have since been replaced by the newer Echo Show 8, for tax purposes, or perhaps in an attempt to unnaturally prop up the product’s purported year end sales (to make it appear that more sold than not).

Who within Amazon would do this? If I had to take a wild guess, I suspect the Amazon Product Management or Marketing team of the Echo 5 was behind this. Of course, it could be my background influencing this conclusion - I’m a Senior Product Manager and Marketing Manager with nearly 30 years in the high tech industry. Or it could be I’m getting more and more paranoid. Or..it could be I really need to write something like this crazy scenario into my third novel, which will focus on a high tech startup. Even if truth isn’t stranger than fiction, this experience has given me some… great ideas.

Update 1/4/2021: Mystery explained! The Echo 5 was a gift from my husband’s new employer, HPE (Hewlett Packard Enterprise). Who would have thought? No note of explanation, but apparently the wife of an employee in his group sent the devices, on the manager’s request, to all the departmental employees. So I jumped the gun and let my imagination run wild. :) Made a cool story, anyway.

Musings on the Historical Fiction Revision Process

in

Though my debut historical novel, WALTZ IN SWING TIME, took over a decade to write and publish, I learned a lot along the way - especially about the revision process. When I finished the first draft of the novel at the end of 2016, I spent a couple of months “reviewing” it before shopping it to agents in early 2017. Little did I know, the bulk of my work had yet to begin. After receiving comments back from agents who had read the full manuscript, I realized I had several significant changes to make before the novel was publication-ready.

First, the manuscript needed more immediate action - and higher stakes. This meant eliminating or drastically shortening chapters in which action happened primarily to external characters, separate from the heroine’s immediate family. It also meant tightening the plot so that each chapter led to another inevitable conflict, stake, or decision. But that was just the beginning.

Two and a half years after I finished my first draft, even after I signed with a small publisher, got dropped, and signed with my eventual indie publisher (Black Rose Writing), I continued making changes. This included several rounds of punctuation, quotations, vocabulary choices, typo corrections. But more importantly, it included inserting an even more dramatic stake for the protagonist, Irene Larsen: the choice between leaving her family and farm for good or pursuing a musical career and marriage far away from them. I also changed the ending chapter so it was more “show” than “tell,” via a dialogue between the main character as an old woman and her granddaughter.

After reviewing/revising the manuscript half a dozen or more times, I was finally able to ensure that all the main actions and decisions fit within the novel’s themes. One helpful way I discovered to accomplish this was by condensing the plot to a short “pitch” for prospective agents and publishers. The first part sets up the conflict; the second part hints at the decision or action at stake; and the third part summarizes the novel’s themes, and why readers should care. Any conflicts and stakes described in the pitch must be highlighted in the novel itself to make it a compelling read.

The second time around, as I’ve revised my second historical novel-in-process (set in San Francisco and Yosemite during 1934), I’ve adopted many of these techniques with improved results. I began writing the pitch while I was still working on the first draft of the novel, to ensure the stakes were raised and the protagonist had a critical decision/ turning point. The first draft took only two years to complete (as opposed to ten), and over the past six months, I’ve completed seven or eight revised drafts. Without fail, each time I re-read the novel, I see other areas that can be removed or tightened.

For example, with historical fiction, authors may be tempted to showcase their research by including most of their findings in the book. I made this mistake with the first draft of my second novel, and quickly realized I had to condense or expurgate this information. The trick is finding the balance between including sufficient detail to give readers a solid picture of the time period and place without overwhelming them with too many useless facts. Dialogue that includes that information, in my opinion, should be removed and summarized, because dialogue is best used to inform readers about characters’ emotional conflicts, not to convey facts about plants, birds, historical decisions, labor strikes, etc.

While I believe it’s important for writers to find three to four beta readers to review a manuscript before submitting/pitching it to agents and publishers, I also believe that ultimately, it is the writer’s first and foremost responsibility to be her own toughest critic and editor. By and large, it’s difficult for readers to articulate what does and doesn’t work in a manuscript; and by the time it gets to an agent, who often are more adept at articulating weaknesses, it’s too late. Therefore, it’s up to the writer to pore over her own draft multiple times, looking for different things each time: plot holes, character contradictions, passages with too many useless facts, typos/grammar errors, overly verbose descriptions, stakes in each chapter, a critical decision or turning point for the protagonist, a theme that “hangs together,” and can be summarized/pitched to an agent.

Some writers claim they edit as they go, but I argue this is not enough, and can never truly succeed. You must re-read the manuscript in its entirety - probably multiple times - to make sure you’ve tightened the plot and raised the stakes to fit the novel’s theme. And as they say, don’t be afraid to “kill your darlings.” If you love a particular phrase or description, but it doesn’t contribute to the overall plot or theme, remove it and set it aside for another novel. The joy in doing this, I’ve discovered, is that with every revised draft, as I reduce the word count in my novel, I’m excited the novel is that much better. My ultimate goal is to wait until I’ve achieved the best possible revised draft before pitching to agents and publishers, which should improve the manuscript’s chances of acceptance.

In summary, completing the first draft of a manuscript is an important milestone to celebrate, but it is just the beginning. The revision process is where the bulk of tightening the plot, sharpening the stakes, and drawing out the theme(s) takes place. In turn, writing a compelling pitch to accompany the plot will help entice agents and publishers, and ultimately readers - something every writer wants.

Is Education the Answer to America's Divide?

I didn’t expect to become so entrenched in politics this year, since for decades, I’ve absolutely abhorred the petty, partisan fights. But the past four years and the stakes of the 2020 election have made me realize I can’t take our democracy and democratic principles for granted. Though I grew up on the promise of a free and fair government and was raised to believe a democratic process is our inherent right as American citizens, I’ve come to understand it can be yanked from beneath us in the snap of a finger. Sinclair Lewis’ classic, It Can’t Happen Here, illustrated the shockingly fast rise to power of an authoritarian politician who coopted the military for his own personal gains. Unfortunately, that’s the trajectory our forty-fifth President has taken.

Though Biden won the election, and it appears that sanity, reason, democracy and science may reign once again, the election was extremely close - too close for my comfort, anyway. About half of Americans were that close to electing a narcissist/fascist man-child to four more years of power, democracy be damned. As a result, many columnists have pointed out the deep divisions in this country, as steep as the ones that divided us during the Civil War one hundred fifty plus years ago. The pollsters once again failed in their predictions that Biden would win in a landslide. Why?

To use broad paintbrush strokes, my understanding is that people on either side of the divide can be roughly categorized as this: On the one hand, Democrats, who for years more or less represented working class, blue collar Americans, are increasingly educated, middle to upper class citizens in America’s suburbs and cities who share liberal views about social mores, helping the poor and disadvantaged, improving class and race relations, seeking knowledge, truth, science, and diversity - hallmarks of the government our Founding Fathers created. Many people of color, regardless of income, fall into this camp, and other (but obviously not all!) immigrants and minorities.

On the other hand, Republicans are increasingly poorer, religious/dogmatic, under-educated citizens who live in rural areas and feel disenfranchised and perhaps robbed by a system that seems to have forgotten about them - so much that they wouldn’t care if Putin were in the White House, so long as he “stuck it to the man” and the unfair system they believe is keeping them down. These are also folks who would rather do their own thing and sacrifice nothing for their fellow citizens, even if it means hundreds of thousands perish as a result.

Now, I realize these are grossly general classifications, and obviously there are people in both parties who do not fit the neat “stereotypes” I’ve outlined above. However, in high level terms, I think there’s a bit of truth in the categories. That said, if people who would vote Putin into office, democracy be damned, are doing it because they feel so disenfranchised, what, really, is a sane solution to this crisis in our nation’s history?

If we assume, for now, that many Republicans are under-educated and live in rural communities, it’s easy to see how they may believe they’ve been left behind. Many manufacturing, industrial and mining jobs have moved overseas or disappeared altogether. Others who work in the service industry are barely getting by on minimum wage and may largely serve people in the middle to upper middle classes. It’s easy to see how they may feel forgotten and resentful.

To me, one hopeful solution to bridge the divide is through education. Now, I realize this is a thorny subject, as teachers are extremely ill respected and poorly paid in our country. It appears the majority in this country would rather pay lower taxes than create stellar educational systems like the ones in South Korea and Scandinavia. But precisely because teachers are so underpaid and undervalued, and education takes a back seat to sports and entertainment, the kids in America’s educational system suffer tremendously. Schools are not universally good across America. There are pockets of good schools in the more affluent areas, and conversely, in the inner cities and rural areas, more often atrocious schools whose administrators care more about scheduling football games than cranking out Calculus equations. (And don’t get me started on math; very few American teachers are trained to understand it, let alone teach it.)

What if, for a change, we encouraged better teachers in America, and motivated more people to make it a career, by paying them as well as we pay engineers, dentists, and scientists? What if we reinstated Clinton’s and Obama’s Teach America Peace Corps programs, and required many graduating college seniors to serve in the program by teaching for a year or two in America’s rural areas and inner cities? Good teachers and engaged communities can make tremendous differences in the lives of young students, inspiring them to learn for learning’s sake, go to college or a trade school - open their minds and explore new ideas and opportunities.

And then, there’s the equally daunting problem of creating new jobs and trades in under-served areas. I’m not suggesting we train ex-miners in West Virginia to become programmers, a proposal by the Obama Administration, which, while well meaning, went nowhere. In fact, programming is not an easy “trade” to learn, and assuming someone can be thrown into it after a few weeks of training is insulting to the software engineers who have taken extensive, rigorous math and computer science classes for years.

But what if we could encourage new jobs, offshoots of the Green movement to prevent/slow climate change? Medical jobs for administering vaccines, distributing PPE supplies, performing contact tracing? Electronic repair for all the smart appliances many homes have? Teaching jobs in primary, secondary schools and junior/tech colleges?

I know this isn’t a silver bullet, and it certainly can’t be solved by one administration, or perhaps not even in one lifetime. But I sincerely believe that by working to close the class divide and giving more people an equal, excellent education (and subsequently career opportunities), we can heal the ugly rift that Trump and the complicit Republicans in Congress have exploited. Yes, this means higher taxes. Yes, this means holding education in high esteem and rewarding teachers with excellent salaries. Yes, this means performing service work for a year or two. (“Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country!”) But compassion, generous donation of time and energy, and sacrifice are required to finally begin closing this huge divide and restoring our Democratic Values.

Letter to Rachel Martin of NPR about Interview with Jeanine Cummins, Author of American Dirt

in

Dear Ms. Martin:

Though I am a long-time NPR fan, I am extremely disappointed with your interview with American Dirt author, Jeanine Cummins. I question whether you and/or NPR even did your homework by reading the book before you conducted your interview with Ms. Cummins, or whether you merely succumbed to pressure from people who obviously did not read it. As a result, you missed an opportunity to shed insight into the plight and peril of undocumented immigrants who flee for their safety to the US, to what they hope will be a better life.

The cries of outrage about this book are completely unfounded and unjustified. I can think of only two reasons for the critics: 1) They did not read the book and instead honed in on the title, which could be misinterpreted as describing immigrants as "dirt," even though the book does anything but. That's unfortunate, and I think a different title could have avoided this hew and cry. 2) They are incredulous that a White woman (who states in the author's note that she married an undocumented immigrant, researched this book for five years, traveled through Mexico and along border towns, and has a grandmother from Puerto Rico) had the "audacity" to write a book from the viewpoint of a Hispanic immigrant.

To these critics I say: Read the book. Cummins portrays immigrants as well-rounded, three-dimensional people who are desperate and often grief-stricken. American Dirt is a masterpiece. It beautifully and compassionately recounts a twenty-first century migrant's journey, evoking hints of The Grapes of Wrath. But to say that Cummins re-used Steinbeck's story does not do it justice. She did not. American Dirt is its own marvel - and it introduces many of us to the harrowing horrors of immigrant life, which do not end even if/when the immigrants manage to make it across the border.

Jeanine Cummins does an excellent job of sympathetically portraying the plight of Central American immigrants as they flee real horrors of cartel violence, rapes, and domestic violence and endure extreme hardships to arrive at what they believe will be a better life.

Her book does not present stereotypical characters who are uneducated, poor, and ignorant. Rather, the main character, Lydia, is a college-educated, bookstore owner with a journalist husband who unwittingly becomes an immigrant who flees for her life with her eight-year-old son, after her entire family is murdered by a cartel in Acapulco. Along the way, she meets other immigrants, including deportados from los Estados Unidos - a man in the middle of his PhD and a female doctor who have been inexplicably and cruelly deported by ICE.

The book is timely in revealing the side of immigrants and their harrowing experiences that many of us do not know or understand. The US is revealed to be no better, necessarily, than the countries the immigrants have fled, with Border Patrol and US agents constantly monitoring, separating children from their parents, and instilling fear and taking bribes. The unspoken threat is that these undocumented people could be collected at a moment's notice. However, for every evil act, there is also an equal act of kindness, proving that there are good, generous people who believe in hope, humanity, and freedom.

The language in the book is gorgeous, tightly written, each word chosen meticulously. Cummins is obviously fluent in Spanish and intersperses Spanish words and phrases with the English, lending to the credibility of the story and its subjects. Thank you, Jeanine Cummins, for a brilliant novel that has opened my eyes to the immigrants' endurance, determination, and excruciating attempts to journey to safety.

Please read it, and do not capitulate so easily to assumptions about who can and cannot write about immigrants or people of different races. Cummins created a "bridge" between US citizens and Hispanic immigrants, and unfortunately, you submitted to political correctness and poor journalism (without conducting research) and did not portray the full picture of what this book has accomplished.

Sincerely,
Jill Caugherty

Book Review of Sue Monk Kidd's The Invention of Wings

in

Sue Monk Kidd’s powerful historical novel, The Invention of Wings, is likely the best book I've read this year! It weaves a beautiful, triumphant tale of two women, one based on historical abolitionist and feminist Sarah Grimke, and the other on Sarah's maid, Hetty ("Handful"), given to her as a "present" on her eleventh birthday by her Charleston slave-owning mother. Told in first person in lyrical prose and alternating between the two women's points of view, Kidd's novel paints a stunning portrait of strong, intelligent women in the early nineteenth century, and their courage to defy the common philosophies and practices of their day to effect change.

Sarah, along with her sister, Nina, is far ahead of her time. Even as a girl, she longs to be a lawyer; loves to read her father's books, though is denied both of these wishes; rejects slavery; and turns down a marriage proposal so she can pursue a career as a Quaker minister - a rare opportunity for a woman in the nineteenth century. Sarah and Nina pen anti-slavery pamphlets, much to the distress of members of the anti-slavery Quaker church, who eject them. Ultimately, Sarah overcomes a speech impediment to join a lecture tour with Nina, proselytizing against slavery. Soon she realizes that in the face of criticism at her "audacity," as a woman, to speak, she must combat sexism, too.

Sarah's handmaiden, Handful, has a much different and brutal trajectory in life as a slave. Sarah attempts to free her numerous times but is prevented by her slave-owning Southern family. Handful's close relationship with her mother gives her hope for freedom, and she learns to read from Sarah, a skill that aids her in numerous, untold ways. She joins a group of slaves and free Blacks plotting to revolt against the Whites in Charleston, but the plot is foiled at the last minute.

At the novel's conclusion, Sarah and Handful unite in Charleston, the city from which Sarah has been exiled because of her "radical" beliefs, in an ingenious plot to free Handful and Handful's surviving sister.

A moving, sweeping masterpiece that explores themes of independent thought, courage, and freedom and is based on important, but little-known women. I give it five plus stars!

Geraldine Brooks' Year of Wonders: Relevant to Today

in ,


After my first reading twenty years ago, I just finished re-reading Geraldine Brooks’ beautiful historical novel, Year of Wonders. Surprisingly, I had forgotten most of the plot, and so I read it anew, with a fresh set of eyes, and without bias. It is a lyrical, inspirational story of resurrecting hope and life from the bowels of death and despair.

The novel is based on the real-life village of Eyam in Derbyshire, England in 1666, the Year of the Plague. On advice of their rector, the villagers decided to self-isolate to avoid spreading the disease to other surrounding villages. Their act was heroic in its resolve, especially given the inevitable hardships and tragedy they consequently faced. (For every person aboveground, two lay below ground by the end of the terrible year).

Still, Anna Frith, the novel’s intelligent and compassionate protagonist, manages to survive and thrive, even after losing her husband to a mining accident, and burying her two young sons shortly later, after they succumb to the plague. Together with the rector's wife, she learns how to cultivate herbs for healing purposes, and even steps in to midwife young mothers - all in sharp contrast to some of the superstitious acts the other villagers, in their ignorance, follow in an attempt to ward off the plague.

The reader roots for Anna and her friend, Elinor Mompellion, who courageously seek to spread healing, information, and comfort among their villagers wherever possible. Brooks’ writing is lovely in its quaint seventeenth century language and phrasing and vivid descriptions. What’s more, the tale is relevant to our current events, if only to put them in perspective, for what the citizens of the fictional English town endured between the “apple-picking season” in 1665 and the return of that autumn season in 1666 was far worse.

Year of Wonders is truly exemplary of historical fiction at its best: accurate in its detail, moving and lyrical in its language, and deeply character driven, with a protagonist who struggles against external events and also faces internal dilemmas that ultimately shape the way s/he perceives the world.

At its core, Year of Wonders is a tale of survival, hope, compassion, and embracing life. Highly recommended during our own turbulent times!

Today's Missed Opportunity: Learning from FDR and the Great Depression

in ,

As the coronavirus pandemic crisis deepens and enters its third month in the US, it appears that the Federal Government has adopted, at best, a “laissez-faire” approach, in which state governors must scramble for resources and even fight each other for those scarce resources, at the peril of citizens’ lives. In short, no coordinated national effort has been established; no efforts have been made to disburse medical equipment and test kits in a controlled way; and chaos reigns (much as it has since January 2017, when the current occupant of the White House bulldozed into D.C. with his showmanship and oversized ego, demonstrating little regard for the American people, except insofar as they might play toadies to his narcissism or help him get re-elected). The White House has chosen cronyism and “each state for its own,” lives be damned, over compassion and unity - a fact that should surprise no one.

At the same time, I can’t help but think of how President Franklin Roosevelt, who served as America’s thirty-second President, from 1933 until his death in 1945, and brought America out of the Great Depression, would have handled things differently. Much differently. FDR established the New Deal programs through the WPA (Works Public Administration) to help the unemployed get back to work by cleaning up the National Parks and cutting new trails, rebuilding roads, constructing new buildings, painting murals, and generally reviving the economy.

Trump and his cronies? Not even close. He has bungled the crisis by failing to respond intelligently, let alone in a timely way, and then hoping it would all just “go away,” like a bad dream. In doing so, he and his Administration have missed a huge opportunity both to shorten the crisis and reinvigorate the ailing economy. Had they approached this emergency as a true national emergency and enemy, as FDR treated the Depression, they could have:

  • Put unemployed people back to work in manufacturing masks, gloves, and other critical medical supplies for healthcare workers

  • Put unemployed people back to work in disbursing those supplies

  • Put unemployed people back to work in manufacturing test kits

  • Put unemployed people back to work in disbursing test kits

  • Put unemployed people back to work in administering tests

  • Headed a national task force to organize widespread testing and tracing and corresponding policies

  • Put unemployed people or small companies back to work in developing contact tracing

  • Put unemployed people back to work in implementing the widespread testing and contact tracing policies

  • Put unemployed people back to work in building new hospitals and healthcare infrastructure

  • Put unemployed younger men and women back to work in rebuilding roads, state parks, and National parks, in a modified version of FDR’s CCC (Conservation Civilian Corps)

  • Put unemployed younger men and women back to work in helping school districts with laptops, WiFi routers, to aid online learning

  • Put unemployed younger men and women back to work in helping Food Banks distribute food to the needy in their communities

  • And the list goes on…

Has Trump done an iota of this? Not even close. Well, he signed his name on checks disbursed by the Federal Government to qualifying citizens (including the dead), in hopes that they would thank him with their vote in November. But when it comes to coordinating efforts across the states, or, dare I say, collaborating with the leaders of other countries to help control the spread and implement best practices that have worked in Hong Kong and Taiwan? No. The man’s narcissism has once again become an impediment to aiding his own people.

And isn’t helping people one of the primary jobs of public servants? Most political leaders in true democracies are altruistic to the extent that they hope to change their communities for the better and help improve their citizens’ lives. But in charge of our precious democracy is not a typical altruistic leader of a free and fair democracy. In fact, he is eerily similar to President Buzz Windrip in Sinclair Lewis’ nineteen-thirties novel, It Can’t Happen Here, who is a hair away from fascism - and then insidiously develops a fascist dictatorship under his citizens’ noses, incarcerating journalists and political enemies, curtailing women’s and minorities’ rights, and hiring his own militia.

We can and should learn from history - and what better way than by reviewing and learning from the policies of FDR, one of America’s greatest Presidents? Maybe, just as FDR sparked hope in the desperate people of the thirties following the 1932 election that he won in a landslide from his predecessor, Hoover; our Democratic candidate, Biden, will take on the daunting task of winning the 2020 election and finally transitioning our country from panic, depression and hatred into hope, tolerance, kindness, and unity.

Interview with Logan Herald Journal and Inclusion in Kirkus Reviews Magazine!

in ,

All,

I am thrilled with a recent wave of positive press that WALTZ IN SWING TIME has recently received:

Thanks to my new readers for your support!

WALTZ IN SWING TIME LAUNCH DAY!

in

Dear Readers,

TCPBC Blog Header-1.png

I’m thrilled that today, April 23rd, marks the debut of my historical novel, WALTZ IN SWING TIME! I’m especially pleased because it’s the first book I’ve written to be published! I began this journey well over a decade ago, in late 2006, when I started writing the first draft. Since then, the manuscript has undergone countless revisions and rewrites. Along the way, I’ve sharpened my skills and gained a deeper understanding about the finer details of the revision process and how to craft a compelling narrative. At the same time, I’ve continued to read and find inspiration from the beautiful prose of my favorite authors (Chang-Rae Lee, Khaled Hosseini, Margaret Atwood, Amy Tan, T.C. Boyle, Wallace Stegner, John Steinbeck, to name a few).

I also learned a little about the publishing and marketing process, and feel truly fortunate, after a topsy-turvy experience, to have finally landed with a reputable, solid publisher, Black Rose Writing, who granted me creative latitude with the title (which has changed a few times since the inception of this process), edits, and the idea behind the cover. In fact, BRW’s creative design team used a couple of ideas and did a marvelous job with the cover, and I’m very satisfied.

To celebrate this long journey, I’m holding a virtual launch party this evening (4/23/20) at 8pm ET. If you are interested, please contact me directly for details.

In the meantime, I hope you will read the book, which is now available in e-book and print copies on Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Google Books, and Black Rose Writing.

And please, if you are able, leave an honest review - on Amazon, goodreads - anywhere you are able.

Thanks for your support!

Perspectives of a Woman in High Tech

in

As both a woman and a long-time veteran of the male-dominated high tech industry (with nearly thirty years in telecom, energy, and IT), I’m an unusual statistic. Even more unusual, perhaps, is my pedigree. I hold B.S. and M.S. degrees in Computer Science (plus an MBA), and for three decades I’ve held technical jobs in the industry, ranging from software development to technical product management. I wish I weren’t an anomaly.

Unfortunately, few women - particularly those who are American born and raised - major in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) fields. That’s partly why the board rooms of tech firms are so barren of female leaders. A handful of prominent women like Sheryl Sanders hold executive positions at tech companies, but even Ms. Sanders’ role at Facebook is non-technical, and she majored in economics rather than a STEM discipline. However, a poor pipeline of female STEM candidates is merely a symptom, not the root cause of the low number of women in the industry.

Below are my observations and thoughts about why so few women enter and stay in tech, and why so few of us have STEM educations:

  • The “brogrammer” cult-like culture of Silicon Valley discourages women from joining. By “brogrammer,” I mean the twenty and thirty-something guys who stay up till three in the morning eating pizza, coding, and playing video games. They may also shoot pool or play foozball during their free time at work, while slurping down caffeine and cracking geeky jokes. (While this is a stereotype, it’s also a perception that carries some root of truth). Women who don’t identify with the brogrammer culture, who can’t see themselves playing video games, cracking inside jokes about Monty Python with “the guys,”, or holing up in the office till the wee hours, may decide not to pursue careers in high tech at all. This creates a chicken and egg scenario.

  • Stereotypes persist of women not being proficient in math and science. From the time they are little girls, women are often encouraged to play with dolls and mini kitchen toys instead of solving puzzles or tinkering with science kits. They are drilled in rote memorization - learning their ABCs, counting, and other mnemonic exercises. As they enter middle school and high school, their perception that boys are superior in problem solving continues and even increases. Many girls, modeling after the mothers, female relatives, and teachers in their lives, may grow frustrated with math and science classes and decide they don’t like these disciplines. In fact, about a decade ago, a Barbie doll was programmed to say, with the pull of a string, “Math is hard.” The perception that boys are naturally more proficient than girls at analytical thinking and problem solving is a myth that needs to be debunked; but sadly, people continue to perpetuate it.

Then there’s the question of why women who do major in STEM and enter high tech careers don’t stay in the industry. Of the dozen or more women I know who joined Nortel Networks in the summer of 1992, I and maybe one other are the only ones remaining in a tech job.

The brogrammer culture may play a role in causing women to exit the industry, as women in tech firms may feel alone and socially isolated. But the other gender-biased stereotypes that often persist in the workplace are to blame, as well. For example, women are sometimes more soft-spoken and less competitive than men in voicing their opinions in meetings. As a result, their ideas may be dismissed, or worse, co-opted by an aggressive male counterpart. Women may not ask for promotions for themselves, either, unlike their male counterparts who have no qualms in doing so.

Likewise, the societal expectations that women grow up with - helping others, collaborating, not rocking the boat, falling in line, memorizing lessons - unfortunately can be their demise in the workforce, as they may be labeled un-creative “followers,” whereas men who ignore these rules are often seen as confident and innovative thought leaders.

On the other hand, women who do speak up and claim their opinions are sometimes seen as unnaturally bossy or hostile, while men who do the same are often commended and rewarded. In fact, women who assert themselves may still be passed over for opportunities like speaking engagements with customers or presentations to executives.

Then there’s the blatant discrimination. The white male managers in power (of typically every high tech department from Product Management to Marketing to Services and Operations, except Engineering) may smirk as women speak, or actively ignore them by playing on their phones or laptops. Maybe these men have decided that they can afford to do so, as women largely do not hold positions of power; and therefore, men’s antisocial behavior in their female co-workers’ presence will not result in repercussions.

The truth is, many of the largely male leaders in tech firms still hold negative perceptions of women as not being analytical or innovative, or they may dismiss women as “doers,” not “leaders,” regardless of the evidence presented otherwise. For those of us in the industry, this is a disappointing and frustrating but all too familiar double standard.

Even with my tech experience and STEM degrees, I still sometimes struggle to be heard and to receive the respect and recognition I feel I deserve, despite having learned to be assertive, calm, and insightful over the years. However, based on my firsthand experience in working for nine different tech companies, this is not as much a problem at corporations who have embraced diversity, and who actively employ a larger number of women.

Finally, when women have children and decide to temporarily leave the workforce, they may have a difficult time returning. And even in 2020, it is still largely women who take leave to care for children and new babies.

What can be done about the problem? Let me be clear that it is not only women’s responsibility to solve. It will take a major societal upheaval to help more women enter STEM disciplines and careers and earn promotions in their jobs. But in the meantime, below are a few short-term things that can help:

  • Provide positive STEM female role models for girls. For instance, if you’re a woman in tech who has a school-age daughter, talk with her about why math and science are important. Introduce her to the high level duties of your job, and explain how you use your STEM background. If you’re not in STEM, find other women who are, and introduce your daughter to them. They can be female math and science teachers, engineers, product managers, and IT employees.

  • If you have a young daughter, give her puzzles to solve, Sudoku, and other math games. Buy kits for her to put together, and help her put them together.

  • Encourage your daughter to excel in math. Help her with her homework. Help build her confidence that she can do well in this subject.

  • If you don’t have a daughter, consider tutoring girls in math or computer programming (if you have these skills), or joining a mentoring volunteer organization for girls in STEM.

  • Form a club for women in high tech in your company or locale. Hold meetings, and share experiences and ideas. Tech jobs are often very demanding, and it takes a lot of strength, willpower, and support to remain in what could be a cold, unfriendly, unrewarding environment and still produce high quality output.

  • If you’re a manager in tech with women on your team, provide them with encouragement and positive feedback. A simple “thank you” can go a long way in showing appreciation and support.

Someday, after I have exited Corporate America for good, I plan to write a novel based on my experiences in the tech industry. For now I’m too close to it, but with some time and distance, I will let my perceptions and experiences flow into my creative writing in what I hope will be both entertaining and insightful - a wider call for action.

Book Review of Rebecca Hodge's Wildland

in

Reviewed by Jill Caugherty

This fast-paced debut thriller by North Carolina based veterinarian Rebecca Hodge keeps readers on the edge of their seats with its cinematic-like action. Besides being a fun read, it delves into the minds of protagonists Kat Jamison and Malcolm Lassiter in alternating chapters that explore human strength, inner courage, and compassion.

Fifty-something Kat Jamison has retreated to the Blue Ridge Mountains for what she hopes will be a respite from the cancer that has hounded her for the last several years, and which unfortunately has returned.  She also has a decision to make: Will she resume cancer treatments, despite what don’t appear to be good odds for recovery and with the certainty of a litany of painful procedures and medical visits?  Now a widow, Kat is on her own, except for her adult daughter, Sara, who arrives at Kat’s idyllic rental cottage with a dog in tow that she foists on her mother – the last thing Kat wants.

Juni, the Golden Retriever, is not the only obstacle between Kat and her desire for peace and solitude.  Soon she befriends two children on the mountain: Lily, the tween daughter of a divorced father, and Nirav, Malcolm Lassiter’s adopted son.  She also reluctantly acquires another dog, an injured pup that she and Lily accidentally find and rescue.  When Lily’s father requests that Lily stay overnight at Kat’s cottage while he finishes a work assignment and Nirav begs to join Lily for a sleep-over at Kat’s cottage; Kat feels forced to agree, reasoning it is only one night, and then she will have the cottage to herself and the freedom to reflect on her cancer treatment options.

But when a forest fire breaks out early the next morning and spreads wildly out of control, Kat’s plans fly out the window as she struggles to lead the children to safety.  The bridge to their parents’ rentals has been destroyed in the fire, separating the children from their fathers, so Kat must blindly forge ahead with a spur-of-the-moment rescue plan.

From here the action picks up pace, as Hodge alternates chapters between Kat’s desperate race for survival with the children and dogs, and Malcolm’s bold plan to rescue all of them in a helicopter.  Kat’s adventures in fleeing the fire with the children and dogs are hair-raising, though at times the reader must suspend disbelief at certain incredibly fortuitous events.  Likewise, Malcolm’s and Lily’s fathers’ adventures in the helicopter keep the reader riveted, as multiple delays ensue, and time seems to be running out for any hope of rescue.

In the end, Kat’s actions to save the children are surprisingly heroic. Malcolm, who has also faced deadly danger during a previous stint in the army, enables her to see that she has a wealth of strength and compassion that has been hiding within her, by explaining how his own dark experience changed him and gave him new confidence: “…As if a different person had been hiding inside, waiting for the right moment to put in an appearance. Eventually, I decided to get acquainted with the stranger I’d become.” Ultimately, the choice Kat must make about her cancer treatments becomes more clear, given the inner courage she has found to confront the fire. 

An action-adventure that also manages to be an interesting character study of courage and compassion.

 

Finding the Inspiration to Write Part-Time

in

Many of us find the recent news scary and depressing: rising cases of coronavirus; hospitals and healthcare workers struggling for sufficient masks, test kits, gloves, beds and medicine; a crashing economy; lost jobs. For the past few weeks, as these events have consumed the media spotlight, they’ve created fear and anxiety. As a result, it’s often difficult to pick up the proverbial pen, regardless of whether you write for a living or do it part-time. I’m no exception.

As my full-time job, I’m a product manager in the high tech industry, where I’ve held positions from software development to marketing for nearly thirty years. Although I enjoy the analytical aspects of my work, I’ve always longed to be a writer, in much the same way that Irene, the protagonist of Waltz in Swing Time, always longed to become a musician.

When I was six, my parents asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. As soon as I replied “an author,” they argued it wouldn’t pay the bills. Of course, there was some truth in what they said. Nonetheless, I refused to give up my dream, and while growing up, I wrote poems, plays, novellas, and stories.  As an adult, I view my work as an important contribution to our family’s finances, and writing as a creative outlet.  Eventually, I still hope to write full-time, because it’s what I love to do. Writing energizes me.

In the meantime, like most part-time authors, I write when I can, which more often than not is a weekend morning or the occasional evening. Maybe having less time to write and viewing it as a treat, not a task, also helps part-timers with the creative process - more so than if writing were a full time gig. In my case, it’s a welcome break from my day job, which generally uses a different set of skills and requires extensive collaboration.

When I sit down at my laptop and open my work-in-process, I usually re-read a few paragraphs, then slip into the characters' lives. Through them, I can vicariously experience walking down a San Francisco street, hiking in Yosemite, or performing onstage in a musical. In some ways, in fact, writing isn’t so different from character acting, except the writer can guide the characters and the plot (though some may argue that the characters themselves spring to life and in fact influence the plot), all while exploring deeper truths. So in much the same way that people enjoy reading books and watching TV shows or movies for a little escape, I write to experiment with different personalities, families, settings, even historical times.

Part-time writers also have the benefit of choosing to leverage a few of the “technical” skills from our day jobs in our writing approaches. For example, I tend to look at the big picture when plotting novels. I don’t start writing until I have a logical, over-arching view of the beginning, middle, and end of the story. Once I’ve created a rough outline of the plot, and have sparked an idea for the protagonist and her conflict, the theme flows naturally. I realize this is a different approach from many writers who play with the idea of a character first, then later evolve that character’s actions into a novel.

The editing process also requires more “technical” skills, including paying attention to detail. Sure, it may not be as fun as the creative part, but it’s equally important to ensure that a character’s actions and dialogue make sense in the context of the greater plot, setting, and time frame. For part-time authors without editors, editing is a necessary evil to hone our descriptions and choice of words, and avoid grammatical and spelling mistakes and other typos.

Finally, the sales and marketing aspects of writing - pitching the finished work to an agent or publisher and promoting it to bookstores and end customers - require a unique set of skills. Although I’ve held B2B marketing positions before, I’ve never before marketed to consumers, so this is my least favorite aspect of the writing process. Though writing blogs and creating trailers can be fun, I’m not so fond, to put it mildly, of promoting on social media or figuring out how to gain the most reviews - e.g. through a Goodreads give-away.

On the whole, writing part-time can provide balance between full-time “technical” work and free-form creativity. Admittedly, it’s much more difficult to write while anxious or sad. As a result, I haven’t sat down to write creatively as often as usual. I’m sure I’m not alone.

Now, more than ever, writers need to remain persistent in putting pen to paper without growing discouraged. We need this creative outlet in order to stay centered while coping with uncertainty, hardship, and stress. In fact, attempting to center ourselves before writing may help, too. This might mean trying a few minutes of meditation (following the breath while counting backward, for instance), or performing yoga routines via a guided video. It may also include taking a walk outdoors, exercising, chatting with a family member or friend, listening to music, taking a bath, or moving to a different part of the house and changing the lighting.

Afterwards, whether you’re a reader or writer, slip into that other world - one totally different from your current circumstances, and unleash your imagination for a while, absorb yourself in the characters and their adventures.  Creative writing, as well as reading and watching movies, can help soothe us and heal our spirits during these difficult times.

In the shadow of a pandemic

in

The first time I felt the world had taken a sharp, surreal turn was the morning after the US Presidential election in November 2016. Stunned, in disbelief, I moved through the day slowly, my mind a fog. Later, unable to make sense of what had happened, I couldn’t shake the feeling that we had entered a hard, dark parallel universe - one that should never have happened.

In the classic movie “It’s a Wonderful Life,” Jimmy Stewart’s character, George Bailey, experiences a glimpse of such a dark parallel world when his guardian angel temporarily shuttles him into the evil twin of his own cozy town. Controlled by the misanthropic, greedy Mr. Potter, Pottersville runs rampant with sad, cruel people, beaten down by their hard circumstances. This glimpse is supposed to give George an idea of what his town of Bedford Falls, New York would have become, had he never been born. Indeed, George Bailey’s evening in Pottersville makes him all the more grateful for his life in Bedford Falls, which he has taken for granted.

Similarly, in the fall of 2016, I couldn’t help but think how carefree I had been, living under what I had taken for granted to be the protection of a democracy with free and fair elections. The reality is that while I and others had enjoyed the benefits of an open, democratic society, a thriving capitalist economy, and laws established by what I thought of as mainly fair, benevolent leaders; others clearly had not. November 2016 heralded a harsh wake-up call that a large and growing percentage of the population felt disenfranchised, underrepresented, and even in despair. This twin of our country’s promises of the “American dream” had been there all along.

Three and a half years later, it’s unclear whether the disenfranchised have received any more assistance. What is clear is that our country’s free and fair elections have been compromised, and the current administration appears to be more concerned with its own image and the possibility of re-election than with the country’s best interests.

Now, in the wake of a global pandemic - the first that almost any of us, including centenarians, has seen in our lifetimes, I again feel that we have swerved onto a dark parallel track.

In my opinion, the disaster and effects of COVID-19 would not have been as widespread under a different administration. The pandemic prevention measures in place in over thirty-five countries would not have been cut; CDC and NIH spending would not have been slashed; test kits would have been ordered well in advance; efforts would have been made to listen to medical experts and collaborate with the leaders of other countries to control the spread; airport screenings and quarantines would have been issued out of caution and foresight.

In short, more capable leaders would have taken action months ago, and warned of the severe implications of a pandemic virus instead of ignorantly dismissing it as “another flu.” They would have had the foresight and wisdom to know that without prevention and preparation, our health care system could crumple to its knees, unequipped to handle the incoming cases and other critical cases; and the economy itself could shrink possibly to the levels only seen in the Great Recession and even the Great Depression.

Oddly, if you went on a rafting trip for three weeks without wifi or cell as apparently at least one group did, you might, upon returning to civilization and after recovering from your shock at the news, even be fooled into thinking that you had returned to a government run by a dictator, where disease is rampant; people live in fear; and only the dictator, his family, and close advisors are protected - both economically and physically.

In this terrible, unprecedented moment in history, we have entered a new normal, where children cannot go to school; many people in the service industry cannot work; and income and long years of savings have gone down the drain. However, I am not normally one to dwell on mistakes of the past, hold grudges, or stew about what could have been done differently. So in the spirit of moving on, I’d like to look ahead and come together with others to help out wherever needed.

As an employee in the high tech industry, I feel fortunate to be able to work from home, as does my husband. This is a luxury that many other industries cannot afford, and I am grateful for it. Homeschooling is not convenient, but it is also necessary, for now, to make sure that kids don’t lose ground and continue to sharpen their skills.

While this is a surreal time, others in history have survived World War I, the Spanish Flu of 1918, the Great Depression, World War II, plus countless other intervening conflicts and strife. In fact, many countries outside the US currently suffer far worse - daily struggles to eat, sweeping mosquito-borne illnesses, conflicts and government upsets that force them from their homes and make them fear constantly for their lives.

Maybe, like the fictional character of George Bailey, we can use this moment as a way of reflecting on what we had that was good, and how we can unite to get through this crisis together, stronger. And then, with an eye to the future, let’s figure out how we can create a better, more equitable system that benefits all, a democracy of our own making: by the people and for all the people.

Why Write about the Great Depression?

in

People sometimes ask why I chose the Great Depression as one of the central time periods of my novel, Waltz in Swing Time. After all, they reason, it’s a dreary chapter in history. One bookseller remarked, “we don’t want to relive it.”

Perhaps that’s why a surprisingly large number of twentieth century historical novels take place instead during World War II. Wonderful books such as The Nightingale, Motherland, and All the Light We Cannot See feature heroic protagonists — soldiers, spies, medical personnel, ordinary citizens — who defy or resist totalitarian governments, despite great personal danger.

In the thirties, United States citizens didn’t struggle against an oppressive regime, but many suffered severe hardships after losing their jobs and income. The country faced an economic divide between the wealthy bankers and Wall Street investors whose reckless speculations may have precipitated the crash of 1929, and the rural communities who struggled to keep their farms as their crop income declined and they couldn’t make mortgage payments.

This may sound all too familiar. In fact, not only did I write about the Depression because of its odd under-representation in historical fiction, I chose it because I see striking parallels between the economic inequality of the thirties and our current economic climate. Today, we see huge disparities in wealth between the upper one percent (not surprisingly, many of whom are Wall Street investors and bankers) and the remaining ninety-nine percent of American citizens. This disparity continues to widen. The wide stock market fluctuations on news of a global pandemic or trade wars also demonstrate how quickly fortunes can rise and fall.

In Waltz in Swing Time, Irene Larsen and her family struggle to make ends meet on their farm in Utah. They’re forced to sell prized possessions and take in boarders, and they watch neighbors lose their farms to bank foreclosures. Unfortunately, this was an all too common reality in the thirties, where in the U.S., the unemployment rate rose as high as twenty-five percent. In urban areas, some homeless Americans lived in shantytowns known as “Hoovervilles,” and reluctantly turned to soup lines for meals. After FDR took office as the nation’s thirty-second President in March 1933, his New Deal programs gradually began turning the tide; and the Depression officially ended with the start of World War II.

In their own way, the people who made it through the Depression were heroic. Sure, they didn’t rescue injured airmen from burning planes or smuggle Jews to safety through the Pyrenees, but they made tough choices and sacrifices for their families and communities. Many of them came together to help each other through difficult times - buying back farm possessions at penny auctions, for example, or raising community gardens to feed neighbors. Musicians, artists, writers, and actors also united to entertain people and distract them from their troubles. The WPA commissioned beautiful murals and paintings by artists around the country, and people found a little reprieve by watching movies and listening to radio programs. In Waltz in Swing Time, Irene entertains Depression-weary tourists at Zion National Park by singing on a variety show.

Maybe, too, surviving hardship helped the people of the thirties gain strength, self-reliance, and a new perspective on what truly matters. That said, I think it’s useful to reflect on this overlooked period of history and draw comparisons with modern times. In the face of a threat to our global economy and livelihoods, perhaps we can put aside the trifles that don’t matter, make a few difficult sacrifices, and come through it together, stronger.

Our Country's Misogynistic Bent

in ,

Elizabeth Warren was roundly defeated on Super Tuesday in favor of the now all-too-familiar barrage of pushy white male politicians in their late seventies. Why? This article from the Atlantic sums it up well: Despite Warren’s competence, intelligence, and thoughtful discourse, our country is apparently too misogynistic to acknowledge her, an accomplished woman, as a viable candidate. Instead, they label her as “condescending” and “strident.”

Huh? In my opinion, compared to Trump and even Sanders and other Democratic candidates, Elizabeth Warren is the antithesis of condescending.

“All we want,” Warren wrote in her 2014 memoir, A Fighting Chance, “is a country where everyone pays a fair share, a country where we build opportunities for all of us; a country where everyone plays by the same rules and everyone is held accountable. And we have begun to fight for it. I believe in us. I believe in what we can do together, in what we will do together.”

Is this an arrogant attitude, a condescending opinion? No. It’s obvious that Warren, unlike Trump, truly wants what is best for the country, not for herself. She wants to improve people’s lives, lift up the masses. Yet, for mystifying reasons (likely the same reasons that Trump was elected to office in 2016), people can’t accept that she’s intelligent, articulate, well-educated and a leader.

Consider Sanders, on the other hand. Isn’t he annoyingly similar to Trump in his egoistic approach to politics, his obnoxious and dogged determination to steal the spotlight?

Well, no. Our country is evidently willing to accept another old white male with known health issues and a semi-narcissistic personality, as a candidate to defeat Trump. In fact, he’s seen as a principled and passionate leader, a take-charge kind of guy. We are also willing to accept Biden (another old white male). But we cannot accept Warren. The masses see her…ahem…as “shrill.”

Of all the first world countries, the US is exceedingly behind in its views and attitudes toward women. Women still get paid eighty cents on the dollar for the same work as men; they are still underrepresented in managerial and executive board positions in corporations; and they have never held the office of President or Vice President in this country.

In 2016, people dismissed Hillary Clinton’s loss to Trump as a result of her personal baggage and a mismanaged campaign. I disagreed then with that reasoning, and I continue to disagree now, when clearly, the evidence points to the fact that our country simply isn’t ready for a smart, capable female leader.

As a woman who has worked in high tech for nearly thirty years, I have seen this “subtle” discrimination in multiple forms at multiple companies. Women leaders are called pushy and abrasive. They are even labeled the “b” word. Men talk over them in meetings; co-opt their ideas as their own; dismiss their successes as “luck,” and pay them less than male counterparts for the same job. Too often, women in analytical positions are held back, because their male counterparts can’t comprehend that they are equally competent in math, engineering and computer science. The female engineers are often labeled “tactical,” the ones who dot the i’s and cross the t’s - not the ones who solve big problems. As for male leaders? They are viewed as confident, respected, analytical, and above all, “strategic.”

Why this double standard? I think it’s the same reason that helped Trump win in 2016: nameless fear. Fear of losing ground. Fear of losing position. Fear of losing authority. Fear of declining earnings. Fear of losing one’s place in society.

Enough already. Fear is crippling, disabling, and thwarts people from being their best. This is why I will, in each and every novel I write (and possibly a high tech memoir in the distant future), highlight strong women and their choices.

A Philosophical (Buddhist) Approach to Writing

in

Like most writers, I love the writing process itself - breathing life into a world of characters, following them vicariously as they explore, encounter conflicts, fall in love, pursue their dreams.

Also like most writers, I’m not as fond of the post-writing process: marketing and selling the finished product. Perhaps I shouldn’t have a negative attitude toward this part of the process, especially since I’ve held marketing positions in my long career in high tech. Granted, marketing to businesses is vastly different from marketing to consumers, as I’ve quickly discovered.

Writing itself is by definition an individual, go-it-yourself process. The marketing and sales part of the process doesn’t have to be, though it often is. When writers do go it alone, they find this process even more challenging when they hear unhelpful comments from strangers like, “Don’t give up your day job.”

That said, I’ve tried to adopt a philosophical, almost Buddhist approach to writing: Give it your best effort, and then accept what happens. In other words, don’t expend undue effort in struggling to change processes or institutions. For example, if bookstores choose not to carry your work due to reasons beyond your control - distributor discounts or refund policies - don’t sweat it. Move on. Look for bookstores that will be more receptive or are willing to deal directly with your publisher.

As a Western writer living in the South, in an area saturated with other writers, I also have to accept that many local bookstores may not be as interested in my work as they would if I wrote about the South. Though the local community in my area is fairly diverse, it stands to reason that many bookstores in the South would still prefer books about the South. That’s okay. Because my full-time job often takes me to Boulder, Colorado, a gorgeous mountain town, I’ve actually found more positive leads in that city.

In the end, don’t kick yourself if your plans don’t go as you expected. It pays to be flexible: Adjust your expectations and your strategy, and stay optimistic. Persistence and a positive attitude tend to pay off; vendors are more likely to be influenced by your optimism, too. Just as practitioners of Buddhism counsel not to yearn for things unduly and to accept that everything is constantly in flux, adopt this own approach with your writing. You may suffer a setback one day, but keep your chin up, because the next day might bring a completely different outcome. Don’t fight attrition. Do your best in writing and then marketing your book, and then accept that you have done as much as you can do.

If your book receives accolades and positive reviews, or even a short bestselling status, you can be pleasantly surprised. If not, chalk it up to experience, events beyond your control, and set your sights on the next book.

And to all my fellow authors, I understand what you’re going through, and I’m rooting for you!

Book Review of Olive, Again by Elizabeth Strout

in

Reviewed by Jill Caugherty
Elizabeth Strout does it again! This novel of connected stories, the sequel to the award-winning Olive Kitteridge, succeeds on many levels as Strout breathes life into completely credible, multi-faceted characters in the fictional town of Crosby, Maine.

Olive, the feisty, blunt matron of Crosby, becomes the novel's center of gravity, and we can't help but like her. As her future second husband, Jack, tries to explain: "God, Olive, you're a difficult woman...Please marry me, Olive. Because I love you.. Because you're Olive."

Opinionated, honest, sharp, and loath to curse (She uses antiquated phrases like "Godfrey," "Hell's Bells," and "Phooey to you"); Olive encounters and interacts with other residents of Crosby, many of whom either love her or hate her. Sure, she might talk about herself a lot, and she might not know when to keep her opinions to herself. But in almost every chapter, each its own stand-out story, Strout reveals Olive's kinder side.

While attending a "stupid, stupid" baby shower ("Labor") in which she has forgotten to bring a present, Olive realizes a guest is going into labor, and delivers the baby in her car. In "Cleaning," Olive notes a grieving girl's devotion to a neighbor at a nursing home, and volunteers to recommend the girl’s cleaning services to an elderly woman, despite the woman’s being “an old horror.” Later, she praises the girl’s dead father. In "Motherless Child," we see Olive struggling to come to terms with the fact that her relationship with her son is rocky, and she has been a less than stellar mother. In "Heart," she demands that a nurse assistant on the opposite side of the political spectrum show some decency, in Olive's house, to a woman from Kenya. In “Friend,” she checks on a fellow resident at their assisted living home, and grants her privacy when she realizes the woman is not “going dopey-dope” but is simply having a conversation with a mother she misses, “calling upon her in her own voice.”

A big, tall woman who gives her signature backward wave of her hand over her head as she bids goodbye, Olive zips out of a story, and we miss her. We're left with the fleeting realization that this is a person you can trust, who is genuine. She speaks her mind; she despises melodrama and emotion; she sees through phoniness; she’s a little self-centered; but she shows kindness in her own way.

Olive, Again is at its most powerful in illustrating its characters' transformations. Even as Olive ages and moves to an assisted living home, she continues to make small, poignant discoveries about herself and the people in her life. She remarks to a new friend, another resident at the nursing home, "I don't think my mother ever really liked me. I guess she loved me, but I don't know if she liked me." After a chance encounter with a famous Nobel Laureate poet from her town, Olive is stunned later to read a poem by the woman in which she, Olive, is portrayed as lonely - and she realizes the poet is right. In “Motherless Child,” she shivers as she sees that “she herself had been raising a motherless child,” who is “now a long, long way from home.” In “Friend,” Olive admires her two dead husbands and reflects on her luck in finding them, but decides it is “herself..that did not please her… But it was too late to be thinking that.”

Strout realistically portrays not just Olive, who is grappling with her flaws and at last gaining some level of self-awareness. Other chapters, even in which Olive doesn't appear, provide the reader with poignant glimpses into the lives of characters struggling to find meaning or attempting to reconcile painful truths. In “Exiles,” two brothers living in Crosby, Maine and New York City, respectively, long to be in the other city. In “The End of the Civil War Days,” an estranged couple who have lived in the same house for years, separately, at last come together as they realize what their estrangement has cost.  In “Arrested,” a man is surprised to discover that his first wife, now dead, was exceedingly more complex than he ever knew. These little, clear truths – often sad and difficult - then bubble up into sharply crafted themes, and make for the quintessential short story.

 While Olive Again is rich in its character portrayals and their self-discoveries, it sometimes omits important moments in Olive’s story by mentioning them only in passing.  For instance, Olive’s courtship and marriage to Jack are missing, as are Jack’s death and Olive’s transfer to an assisted living home.  These details are not hugely important, however, as we trace Olive’s passage through time; and their absence does not detract from her transformation.

Unlike the meandering, seemingly unfocused plots of writers like Alice Munro, Elizabeth Strout's stories are beautifully crafted, packaged and powerful. In Olive Again, Strout creates well-rounded characters, rotates them from all angles for her readers to inspect – warts, quirks and all -- and allows them to arrive at surprising new realizations about themselves and their lives.  Kudos, Ms. Strout! Five stars!