Hammers and Other Tools of the Trade

I just turned in my very last assignment for my MFA. And it felt like the kind of thing I should post elsewhere, too. 

I’ve got two big passions: writing and acting. (And also Netflix documentaries.) As I try to scratch out this last assignment for this class—my last assignment for my entire MFA—I keep thinking about how much the two have in common. And how much they have in common with painting or being a musician or any other branch of the arts. They all share the same DNA, and there are all these fundamental similarities. So I’ll say “writing” for the rest of this piece, but I really mean “art in general.”

Good writing takes vulnerability and courage and honesty. I had a director once say “what comes from the heart goes to the heart.” It doesn’t matter if it’s fiction or not. It won’t resonate if it’s not “true.”

Good writing takes a whole toolbox of skills. And you won’t use every tool in your toolbox for every thing you write. Some pieces need a hammer, and trying to use a tape measure would be counterproductive. Half of learning how to write is gathering tools, and the other half is learning how to pick the right tool for the job.

You can write for two reasons. One, because you are compelled by some muse. Two, in order to pay the bills. Ideally, you can do both at once. But not always. Sometimes you may write things you’re not passionate about so that you can pay the bills. And sometimes you write things you’re passionate about just because the muse speaks to you, and you eat mac and cheese for a few weeks until your next check comes in. But I think perhaps, the longer you stubbornly do both of those things, the more likely it is that you’ll be able to do both at the same time.

Becoming a published writer takes a kind of shameless and obnoxious self-promotion, and it sometimes feels icky. But it doesn't have to be icky. Don't think of it as selling yourself, but rather as sharing something you care about (your work) with others.

Finally, there will be days when it comes easily, when you brush up against that column of light, or if you’re really lucky, you’ll stand right in the middle of it. And there will be days when you’re tired and frustrated and stuck and the muse is silent. But keep writing anyway. Just sit down and do the work. Writing isn’t all inspired. But if you learn to swing a hammer, the muse will sometimes grab your hand and tell you where to aim.

photo via

"Because paper has more patience than people."

I have been keeping a journal for 17 years. A few months ago, Jacob asked me what my motivation for journaling has been. I answered with a lot of reasons--because I write compulsively, because writing helps me think through things, because I know it will be fun to go back and read about later, because it will be an important record for future generations. But when I thought about the first journal entries I ever penned, and what motivated those, I realized suddenly that it was the diary of Anne Frank.

I was about 12 when I first read Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl...one year younger than Anne was when she wrote her first entry. It is one of the most well-loved and oft-read books I own. I still have my original copy--I think I got it as a birthday or Christmas gift. It is one of the few books that survived moving to Oregon, my entire college experience, and various purges/spring cleanings. I've read it so often that I have whole sections of it memorized.

Anne articulated for me so many aspects of growing up, even though our worlds were so different. The feeling of being misunderstood, of being afraid to show anyone your better side in case they laugh at you, of having opinions and thoughts and aspirations that people don't take seriously because you are young. And I know I'm not the only person who felt that way--it's part of why the book has been so well-loved for so long.

Anne Frank's diary gave me courage as a young girl...courage to pursue my dreams and develop my gifts. Her words gave me confidence during lonely times, when friends were hard to come by, or when family members were fighting, or when the world just seemed too big and confusing to be a part of. The diary inspired me to write my own stories and experiences, and this blog exists in part because of that inspiration. This story is very very very dear to my heart, and it always will be.

Until this last week, I'd never seen any adaptation of the story. Not the play, not any film or television. I think I've been afraid of this enormously beautiful part of my life being...well, slaughtered. It would be heartbreaking to have this beloved story told poorly. But I finally girded my loins and headed to the Hale Centre Theatre Orem's production--an old friend was playing Dussell, and I wanted to see his work in this story that I love so much, and to see if the story could really be told on stage. So I sat in the 4th row and watched as ten actors told the story.

And it was beautiful. It was as close to perfect as it could get.

It is an astonishing challenge to portray people who really lived. And for so much of my life, I've seen each character through Anne's eyes...unfeeling Mummy, insufferable Mrs. Van Daan, the shy and dear Peter, the stodgy and foolish Dussell. But the play allowed me to see each character even more fully. Mummy only seems unfeeling because she and Anne don't quite understand each other, but they long for one another's love. Dussell is simply a man set in his ways, and having to go into hiding with two full families is hard on him. Mrs. Van Daan was truly happy when she was young, and her life hasn't turned out quite the way she wanted it to, and that hurts her.

(Part of me wishes I could have seen this show earlier, so that this blog could also serve as a review and a "go see this show!" But closing night was Saturday...oh, the impermanence of theatre.)

The script does a wonderful job of bringing Anne's diary to life, and condensing some of the most important parts into a 2-hour production. There were little details that I noticed and loved--the mention of the Westertoren clock, Anne's moment of talking about the window in her room, the giving of gifts. Anne gives all of these things a lot of thought in her diary, and seeing them nodded to onstage warmed my heart. And the script manages to capture the humor of Anne's world as well as the heartbreak--the anger as well as the love.

HCTO's stage conventions were also perfect choices (and I don't know whether some of these are specified in the script or not). The audience entered through the hidden door that concealed the entrance to the "Secret Annexe"--complete with a bookcase. And as soon as any of the "Secret Annexe members" entered the stage, THEY STAYED ONSTAGE. This included during scene changes (which were done through dimming the lights and a voiceover of one of Anne's diary entries, during which the actors would complete any costume changes), and during intermission. It was such a perfect convention--because the Van Daans, the Franks, and Dussell truly did have to stay there the entire time. Having the actors remain onstage and in character during intermission allowed the audience to see the way they must have spent most of their time, in boredom or in games, in conversation, or resting.

An enormous shout out must be given to each of the actors. I could spend hours singing each of their praises, but I'll just say that their performances were flawless. I think part of my love of the show was simply because what was presented onstage perfectly matched what I've seen in my head for all these years. Often when we dislike some movie or play, it's because what we see on stage or screen DOESN'T match our imagination, but this time, it happened to align perfectly for me. (And a big shout out must be given to Dan Anderson as well, for superb costume design. You've a good eye, sir, and your design heightened the storytelling without distracting from it.)

In all my years of reading "Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl," I've only read the afterword a few times. I know the story of what happened to each of the members of the Secret Annexe. But Anne's diary doesn't cover it--we don't hear about the events in her voice. So I've never had to really face it. I've never had to watch the faces of the Van Daans and the Franks and Mr. Dussell as they listened to the sounds of the approaching Gestapo. I've never had to witness their fear and despair as the knocking and hammering got louder and louder. And my heart splintered watching it.

Anne Frank's story is an important one, and a beautiful one. Not only because of the story she tells, but because of the beautiful way she tells it. In one journal entry, she writes:

“I want to go on living even after my death! And therefore I am grateful to God for this gift, this possibility of developing myself and of writing, of expressing all that is in me. I can shake off everything if I write; my sorrows disappear; my courage is reborn. But, and that is the great question, will I ever be able to write anything great, will I ever become a journalist or a writer?”

In the tragedy of Anne's story, there is such beauty in knowing that her dream came true. She goes on living, even after her death. And in her own way, she did write something great, and she became both a journalist and a writer.

I know I can't speak for them. But I feel certain that the real Otto and Edith Frank, that the real Mr. and Mrs. Van Daan, that the real Peter, the real Margot, the real Albert Dussell, and the real Anne Frank would be honored and pleased by HCTO's production, even if they would be surprised by it. I'm sure none of them expected their story to become so widely known, but I feel as though the universe gave Anne and each of her Secret Annexe housemates a gift. They get to have their story told, and they stand as voices of the millions whose stories we will never know. I left the production filled with gratitude for both Anne and her diary, and the world of theatre that brought it to life.

The Art Assignment: Stacked Books

Almost two months until my birthday, and I'm almost done with my "9 Things To Do While 29." One of those goals is to complete three "Art Assignments." The Art Assignment is an online PBS show hosted by Sarah Green, where she interviews different artists, gives some art history knowledge, and gives viewers an assignment to create a piece of art on their own. Each assignment has specific inspiration and instruction.

So here's my first one! This is called "Sorted Books." You can watch the video about the assignment here. The idea behind it is that you can get a glimpse into someone's life and personality by examining the books they have in their personal library. The artist, Nina Katchadourian, selects books and stacks them to form "found poems" or short sentences. You can see some of her brilliant work here. The instructions are simple:

1. Choose a person you know or would like to know better
2. Take a look at/through their library
3. Make 3 stacks of books to develop a portrait of the person
4. Upload it to your social media platform of choice using #theartassignment
5. Fame and glory (your work might be featured in a future episode)

I decided to work from Jacob and I's own library, but to only use books that Jacob has contributed--books he owned before we were married, or books he has purchased since then for himself. I used my iPhone to photograph the stacks I created, so they aren't exactly high quality, but they get the job done. I decided to photograph the books on our bed, since our bookshelves are in our bedroom, right across from where we sleep, and because the bed is the place we do the most reading--together and separately.

Ladies and Gentlemen, The Bible! 

The Given Day

The Way it Spozed To Be

The Ancestor's Tale

How We Are Hungry

Armageddon Summer

Paradise Lost

Where I'm Calling From

All Who Go Do Not Return

With Good Reason

Crucial Conversations

Who Am I? 

I Am A Strange Loop

I'll Seize the Day Tomorrow

I feel a little uncertain about whether or not this assignment really does give an accurate glimpse into the life of a person. It's such a selective glimpse, and such a constructed glimpse. It's difficult to distill someone's entire personality into three stacks of books. These stacks sort of represent certain aspects of Jacob, certain ideas he thinks about, but these stacks are mostly using Jacob's books to represent what occurs to me...the ideas and constructions that I see.

Still, it was a fun assignment, and I'm excited to do more!

Frozen Agendas: A Bit of Paranoia Satire

***WARNING: SPOILER ALERT***

If you haven't seen Frozen yet, I'd suggest watching it before reading this post.

By now, you may have heard about or read a blog entry by a woman named Kathryn Skaggs, all about how the film Frozen is part of Disney's Big Gay Propaganda Machine. Basically, her argument is that Frozen seeks to normalize homosexual behavior...not just in the appearance of a gay character or two, but in the ENTIRE PLOT OF THE MOVIE. There have been plenty of great responses, including this one and this delightfully snarky one. (There's also this post from the NY Post summarizing some of the other "hidden agenda" theories.) I joined the discussion on facebook, and a friend came up with a brilliant game she called:

"Fabricate a Moderately-to-Totally-Plausible 

Agenda Behind 'Frozen'!"

Here are some of the highlights of our satire-creation:

It's about mommy issues. The mother represses the eldest daughter's true nature out of protectiveness for the younger daughter, then dies, causing intense but suppressed emotional trauma. Elsa, as the oldest sister, defaults into the mother role, but isolates herself from her "daughter," perhaps due to her own conflicted emotions about her own mother. Anna matures into the mother role and attempts to bring her sister home and rescue her from her self-imposed isolation, but the relationship is too damaged and Anna receives a wound that symbolizes the emotional pain and "coldness" that results from a lack of maternal affection. Ultimately, the sisters save one another by taking on their mutual maternal responsibility. With this, the eternal winter fades and the world is restored to spring/fertility.

ACTUALLY, it's about communism. Elsa's abilities regarding cold make her symbolic of the Soviet Union, since that part of the world is cold. As a "Soviet communist," Elsa is feared by the villagers, who are all essentially McCarthyists. Elsa's self-proclaimed isolation in the mountains is symbolic of communist nations' tendencies to insulate themselves from outside forces. And her famous anthem "Let It Go" is CLEARLY about giving wealth and possession up to the state. You'll notice there's a TOTAL lack of religion in "Frozen"? That's because religion is the opiate of the masses, comrade. Anna's sacrifice for her sister is symbolic of the sacrifices all citizens must make to "Their Dear Leader." From "Frozen" we learn that it is only by giving up everything to communist power that we can be saved.

It's clearly a liberal attack on puritan value systems. The parents cause Elsa to feel that something intrinsic to her is a source of shame which should be hidden. This causes Elsa to believe that her only choices are pain for her and those around her caused by her nature or a life of isolation. Only after Elsa has accepted her inherently sinful nature is she able to control her power. When others are willing to accept her without shaming her the world is restored to it's natural order. This implies that puritan values lead to a culture of shaming and that we should try to avoid making other people feel the shame that they need to feel in order to... do something good. Because shame is good. Yeah...

Obviously Frozen is about the dangers of an Iran armed with nuclear weapons. First, duh. Nuclear winter. Elsa obviously is Iran. The movie's agenda is to get the American public on board with renewing diplomatic ties with Iran. As Elsa's isolation made her kind of unbalanced it will do the same to Iran, therefor it is only through diplomacy and understanding that Iran can use its "power" for good and become a peaceable nation and reliable US ally. The sequel will promote complete rejection and annihilation of the Israeli state in order to further cement the agenda of the prequel. See. Obvious. Stand by Israel. Boycott Frozen!

I thought is was about being nice to snowmen, and reindeer instead of real men.

"Frozen" is pushing for the legalization of meth. It's only after Elsa fully indulges in her "crystal" powers that she's able to actualize as a human being. Her song "Let it Go" is about rejecting the societal norms that shame her drug use (not being a good girl anymore, "no right, no wrong, no rules for me," etc.) and using the altered state of consciousness provided by her crystal use to come into her own as a creative being.

As for me, I'd say that Frozen's agenda is all about bestiality. I mean, Kirstoff is very close to Sven, too close to suggest their relationship goes beyond that of owner and pet. This message is all there in the song "Reindeer are Better than People." Hello! What other message can you get from this aside from the belief that bestiality is okay?!

Frozen is clear environmental propaganda. The story tries to trick you into thinking that you somehow have the power to save the earth or create a new ice age. It's disturbing that Disney is indoctrinating our children with the lie that we have some sort of control or responsibility to the earth. Written by liberals trying to distract us from the REAL problems! Like the gaaaaays!

I don’t think it is pushing ANY of those liberal agendas. It is clearly fraught with religious undertones. This is the story of two different types of believers, Anna, to whom faith comes easily, and represents the Protestant Reformation, and Elsa, who dually represents the convert, as well as the pre-Reformation church. After her first spiritual experience, Elsa chooses to leave and go to the mountains, where she builds a castle. There is no mistaking the ornate, cathedral appearance of her new home. “Let it Go” refers to her baptism of sorts, where she lets go of her previous life of sin, and embraces her new life of Christianity. She even mentions “heaven.” Her statement that the “perfect girl is gone” is her acceptance and realization of her fallen, sinful state, and need for a Savior. However, still early on in her spiritual journey, and still representing the pre-Reformation church, she believes her baptism to have absolved her of all sin past and future, leaving “no right, no wrong, no rules.” Anna comes to decry the error of Elsa’s selfish ways, and is punished with ice through her heart, or an attempt to “freeze” the Protestant Reformation in its tracks. Elsa only truly comes to understand the true power and grace of Christ later through her sister’s own sacrifice, where she is willing to give her own life to save Elsa’s. With both of them now behind the Reformation, they oust the supporters of the old religion (the duke and prince). There is nothing liberal about this at all, unless you are talking liberal for the 16th century.

It's a commentary on the importance of authentic spiritual expression, and maybe even a promotion of pagan/nature-based/magickal spiritualities over Christianity. In fact... Yes. Let's run with that. The cathedral-like palace and ritual of coronation obviously refer to the accoutrements and ritual of Catholicism and, to lesser extent, various Protestant denominations. This environment represses Elsa's true creative (and therefore god-like) spirit. It's only after she flees this restrictive environment and embraces her intrinsic connection to nature, in an environment of solitary contemplation and magick-working, that she is able to return, heal her sister, and replenish her kingdom's abundant natural resources.

Dude. The movie is totally phallic. Hello. The snowman's nose? Really. Those people are all gonna go blind.



Here's the thing about everyone saying "Frozen has a hidden agenda! Frozen has hidden symbolism! Here's what Frozen is REALLY about!"*

At it's heart (ba-dum-chhhhh), Frozen is about fear and love.

Which means that if an agenda has ANYTHING to do with fear OR love, you can probably find it somewhere in Frozen.

The truth is that we don't see things as they are. We see things as WE are. Everyone will have a different personal interpretation of art, and the majority of them are totally valid as personal interpretations. But there's a difference between sharing your personal interpretation and accusing someone of creating propaganda. Kathryn Skaggs' personal interpretation of "Frozen" is totally valid for her personally, even if it's different from your personal interpretation. And if what she sees in Frozen goes against the dictates of her conscience, she has every right to NOT WATCH THE MOVIE ANY MORE. But everyone else has a right to watch the movie and see in it whatever they would like to see in it. And most of all, don't let FEAR dictate your interpretations of art. (Especially when that art is all about overcoming fear with love.)

*What's that? You'd like to hear Jennifer Lee talk with other successful screenwriters about the process of creating the story for Frozen, and what the story is really about? Well, here.

Thanks to everyone who contributed to this post with their satirical interpretations of Frozen! 

Inspiration: Romance in Black and White

love is more thicker than forget

more thinner than recall

more seldom than a wave is wet

more frequent than to fail

it is most mad and moonly

and less it shall unbe

than all the sea which only

is deeper than the sea

love is less always than to win

less never than alive

less bigger than the least begin

less littler than forgive

it is most sane and sunly

and more it cannot die

than all the sky which only

is higher than the sky

e.e. cummings