Playing With The Stars: Visiting the Hollywood Wax Museum

The original Hollywood Wax Museum has occupied a prime spot on the Hollywood Boulevard Walk of Fame, just east of Highland Avenue, for nearly fifty years, and is still owned and operated by the family who started it back in 1965. But this place is no dusty, stuffy relic of old-time show biz--visitors are encouraged to become part of the show here. Everything you’ll encounter is camera-ready, and you’re more than welcome to get in the picture.

Tall Paul and I began our recent visit to the Museum with that wax-museum staple, the Chamber of Horrors. This version focuses on monsters from the movies, of course, and is less interactive than other sections of the museum. This is where you’re more likely to take pictures of the figures than with them. I think that makes sense, though--really, how close do you really want to get to Dracula, or Frankenstein, or Hannibal Lecter? I’d just as soon keep my distance from Voldemort, thanks.

If you prefer to keep your distance from any and all monsters, you can

Life size, on the Red Carpet

go straight to the Red Carpet, where you can mingle with A-listers like Brangelina, George Clooney, Morgan Freeman, and Nicole Kidman. Play paparazzi all you like here--it's all designed for family fun!

As you continue on, you’ll find a very eclectic mix of familiar faces in and out of character. You may see some of them more than once, in different roles--or maybe you won’t. The Museum’s collection represents nearly a century of entertainment, and is frequently rotated and updated based on visitor surveys. Therefore, you may not see the same figures on your visit that we did on ours, but you will see movies, TV, and music are all represented, and you’ll be able to get up close for photos of, and with, the stars.

Details matter: Indy has stubble, and Jeannie has no navel

Each wax figure in the Museum is individually crafted, and so I wasn’t surprised to see that the degree of resemblance to their subjects varies quite a bit. Everyone’s recognizable, but some are remarkably accurate likenesses with an impressive level of detail--right down to Indiana Jones’ chin stubble, for example.

Of COURSE I love Lucy!

This tribute to popular culture and entertainment offers plenty of entertainment in itself. The Museum’s website invites you to “come play with the stars,” and that’s what we did. Tall Paul and I had a fun afternoon posing and playing and making jokes among the wax figures. Half the fun of taking photos in tourist attractions like the Hollywood Wax Museum is coming up with the captions you’ll give them when you post them on Facebook--or coming up with the captions and then composing the photos to go with them--right?

The Hollywood Wax Museum is located at 6767 Hollywood Boulevard in Los Angeles and is open daily (365 days a year) from 10 AM to midnight. Tickets are available online and at their box office. I received complimentary admission to the Museum to facilitate this post.

I was selected for this opportunity as a member of Clever Girls Collective and the content and opinions expressed here are all my own.

Read More

WW: Feast (Your Eyes)!

If you want to feast with my family, you'll have to join us for a birthday party or Christmas Eve dinner at my sister's house.

Read More

Road Tripping: Or, Facing My Fear of the Freeway

One decision I made as my first marriage was ending was that when it was all over and our son was off to university, I was moving to Southern California. That decision led to a personal understanding: if I planned to live on the West Coast, on my own, I was going to have to conquer my fear of driving on limited-access highways. I hadn't done it for nearly a decade. It wasn't necessary in Memphis. In Los Angeles, it absolutely would be.

A highway in neither Memphis not Los Angeles: I-93, Boston, June 2013

I stopped driving on highways after a car accident in June, 1991. It happened on a Monday morning, as my family was driving back to Ithaca, New York after spending a few days in Florida for a friend’s wedding. My (first) husband (“1H” for the rest of this story) and I traded time behind the wheel, and I was taking the first shift that day. Not long after we entered I-95 near Brunswick, Georgia, I saw that a truck was about to merge onto the highway. As I adjusted to give it room, I felt a bump from behind...and I got completely spooked. I couldn’t seem to slow the car down, and I thought we were speeding directly into a rock face straight ahead. I wrenched the car into the median to avoid it and drove us back in the other direction, still unable to get my foot off the accelerator. When I finally brought us to a stop, the car had two blown tires and a bent frame, but no one was injured.

I think I bounced off a car that was in my blind spot when I tried to make space for the truck, but I’ve never been entirely clear on what happened--or forgotten the flood of adrenaline and terror that accompanied it. When we got back on the highway, 1H took the wheel, but told me that if we didn’t continue to trade off for the rest of the trip, he believed I would start developing a phobia, so he was not going to do all driving for the next two days. I figured he was right about that, and the rest of our shared drive was uneventful, if not entirely relaxed.

The phobia set in later. Ithaca has been called “centrally isolated,” and it’s nearly an hour’s drive from town to the nearest interstate on-ramp. I didn’t get exposed to the possibility of highway driving again until November, when we moved to Memphis for 1H’s new job. By then, neither of us felt comfortable with the idea of me driving long distances at highway speeds, so he did it for the entire trip--and for the rest of the 1990s.

Sharing your plans with someone else tends to make you feel accountable. That kind of accountability has both pros and cons, and when it comes to plans that really don’t affect anyone besides me, I tend to shirk it--no one else hears about those plans until I’ve acted on them. (That lets me avoid awkward questions about whether I have acted, or when I will.) By the middle of 2001, not long before 1H and I filed for divorce, I had a plan to take to the highway, and I didn’t mention it to anyone.

Memphis isn’t a bad place to live if you don’t like highway driving--it does make getting around town easier, but you can do without it just as easily. For those same reasons, it’s also not a bad place to teach yourself highway driving (again). I started with the automotive version of baby steps, on my own. During one long late-summer weekend when 1H was out of town, I drove from our house to nearby Highway 385, got on at the first entrance ramp I reached, and got right back off at the next exit, breathless and agitated for the entire stretch (which probably lasted about three minutes). Then I did it again, a few more times, traveling a little bit further between exits with each attempt. When I picked 1H up at the airport, I told him what I’d been doing, and he challenged me to make part of the drive home on Interstate 240. I did it.

I certainly wasn’t ready for rush hour yet, but within weeks I was occasionally forsaking my all-surface-street routes to use I-240 for my drive to and from work. I built up slowly, but with intent: I was leaving for California at the end of June, in my car. Although a co-driver was making the trip with me, I intended to do most of the driving for at least three solid days on highways. And I did--although, by mutual agreement, I didn’t drive the last leg, into and through Los Angeles itself. There would be plenty of opportunities to work my way up to that.

I rarely drive during road trips now, but it’s for different reasons. it’s partly because Tall Paul actually enjoys driving (and is a terrible passenger--the two things may or may not be related), and partly because an 80-plus-mile daily round-trip commute on four freeways makes me more than happy to let someone else drive when I can. I still tense up when I’m on an unfamiliar stretch of local highway, but I’m not sure that’s so bad; the list of places where driving is more “defensive” than it is in LA is probably not very long, so it’s important to stay on alert.

My freeway fear is mostly behind me now, although it's prudent not to let go of it completely, especially when it rains in Southern California. I still tend to seek out alternative, non-freeway routes when I can--I just like knowing my way around, and you get to know an area better when you come down from the highway--but I’m glad I don’t have to rely on them. I could get to and from work on nothing but surface streets if I had to--I know several routes across the Valley and down into Hollywood--but I wouldn’t really feel like working by the time I finally got there, and I wouldn’t have much time to work before I’d have to start the trip home. It's not hard to feel like you spend all day in your car when you're driving on the freeways of Los Angeles. But without those freeways, you could actually spend all day in your car, and I’m glad I'm not forced by my fears to do that.

This “Thoughts From My Reading”  was inspired by Some Nerve: Lessons Learned While Becoming Brave, by Patty Chang Anker. I just finished reading it and will have my thoughts on the book itself posted here in a few days; one of the chapters is about fear of driving, but I wrote this piece before I got to that.

Read More

Sunday Salon: An Open Letter to Restless (Book) Bloggers--Don't Forget Who Makes The Rules

Dear (book) bloggers,

I’m writing in response to posts I’ve come across recently from some of you. Like me, you’ve self-identified as “book bloggers,” but maybe you’re starting to feel a little hemmed in by the label. Maybe you’re itching to branch out in some new directions, but you’re not sure exactly how--or what sort of reaction you'll get if you do. As Becca said, and I get the feeling she's not alone:

“I have been trying to decide for myself whether I really want to continue blogging.  I have been reading but the thought of writing a review seems boring (gasp!) and I think I need a new approach to blogging in order to kick start my mojo, if you will.

“I am contemplating creating a blog that goes beyond books and book reviews and book news and stretches into all kinds of things I am interested in.  I have so many more interests than reading and I would like to explore them.  I have thoughts on so many subjects that I have no platform for.  I want a blog where I can write whatever the hell I want to and not worry that it is not book-related.  I realize this may turn some readers off but you can’t please everyone, right?”

I’ve been preaching this particular bit of gospel all year, and I’ll say it one more time:

THERE’S NO ONE RIGHT WAY TO DO THIS.

There are plenty of people who would disagree. Heck, there’s an entire industry based around How to Blog, and no shortage of “expert” answers to questions about content development, niches, platforms, engagement, and a bunch of other buzzwords. But you don’t have to listen to all of them, or any of them--and you certainly don’t have to listen to me. I hope you will, though, for a minute.

I’m different from some of you. I knew from the beginning that this blog wouldn’t be about books alone. I knew not too long after the beginning that I didn’t want to divide my interests across several blogs--I wasn’t going to find my “niche,” because I wasn’t going to look for it. I blog a lot about books and reading because they’re a big part of my life, but they’re not MY LIFE. For most of the nearly seven years I’ve had this space, I’ve been unapologetic about that--and I’m a chronic apologizer, so that’s saying something.

I can see how it might feel different if you’ve established your blog as a Place That’s About Books, and chosen not to blog about anything that wasn’t at least mildly book-related. You may be feeling as if you’re breaking an agreement with your blog readers if you bring other topics into the conversation. And to be honest, some of your readers may feel that way too...but it doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll lose them. As long as you don’t abandon books completely, they probably won’t abandon you--they just may skip over the posts that don’t interest them. They may even discover that some of your non-book-related posts DO interest them after all. And people who aren’t all that into book-related content may just discover that you’re interesting, period.

In my experience, readers don’t stick with blogs like ours because of what the person blogs about. They stick around because they get to know, and (hopefully) like, the voice of the blog and the person behind it. Opening up your blog to a wider range of the interests and opinions that make you YOU offers us more chances to do that.

I hope you’ll take that chance. Your blog is your space, and the only real rules it has are the ones you make--and break. Do what you want with it, and please don’t apologize for it.

love,

Florinda

Read More

Gettin' a Little Saucy (Weekend Cooking)

(NOTE: This is based on an exercise we did in my writing workshop this week, and I thought it might work as a Weekend Cooking post, although I don't think I've ever participated in Weekend Cooking before! Weekend Cooking is a weekly blogging feature hosted at Beth Fish Reads.)

I made a batch of family-recipe marinara sauce last weekend. The specifics of our recipe tend to vary--every cook in every generation of my mom’s family has tweaked it, and no one measures anything--but the constants are just that: canned tomatoes, tomato paste, garlic, onion, and basil leaves. (We don’t use pepper, but you can add it at the table if you like.)

This red sauce--Italian gravy--is the fragrance of Sunday dinners at my great-aunts’ apartment in Co-op City in the Bronx. We could smell it as we got off the elevator and started down the gray-tiled, echoey hallway to their door. We took off our shoes when we walked in, and left them next to the green loveseat in the foyer. My sister Teresa and I went into the living room. We’d give the playground, twelve floors below, longing looks through the big windows as we read or played on the plastic-covered furniture, waiting for dinnertime, which usually began around 2 in the afternoon.

We called it “macaroni” back then, in our family. We crowded around the kitchen table as it was spooned into shallow bowls, and topped with meatballs, grated Parmesan cheese and the gravy. Teresa and I would eat our macaroni, and then we’d ask to be excused. If the house was especially full that day, we might have to slide out of our chairs and crawl under the table to leave the kitchen and return to our play. Sometimes we might ask to watch TV. Sometimes we’d ask why we couldn’t take the plastic covers off the sofa.

At home, macaroni and meatballs was an evening meal. On Sundays at Aunt Millie and Aunt Mary’s, it was the first course. The grown-ups stayed at the table for baked chicken with potatoes, and salad and bread. Then there would be some time for clean-up and conversation before coffee and cake--dessert was always “coffee and cake.”

Sunday dinners in that apartment are central to my childhood memories, and the smell of good red sauce means home. Whenever I’ve moved as an adult, I haven’t felt like I’ve truly claimed the kitchen until I’ve cooked my first batch of red sauce there. It took me three months to do that in our new house, but I guess that means that after last weekend, it truly is home.

Read More

A Fan(girl)'s Notes: DOCTOR WHO, Part 2 of 2--A Selected, Subjective "New Who" Episode Guide

I can’t play favorites with “classic” Doctor Who episodes, for reasons I’ve previously explained, but I certainly can with “new” Who, and I’m about to do just that. If you’ve never watched Doctor Who, these may be good ones to sample for a sense of the show as it is today. If you’re a Whovian of any era, I’m happy to discuss, defend, or debate my picks with you, and I’d love to have you share some of yours in the comments! But first, let me answer some non-episode-specific "What's your favorite...?" questions--

Playing favorites with Captain Jack and the Tenth Doctor at WonderCon 2013

• Doctor: Ten (I may have mentioned that already, too)

• Companion: Donna Noble. Her character arc allows her a lot of growth as it moves toward a heartbreaking end, and I love the bantering, bickering interplay between her and Ten.

• Companion, Runner-up: Rory "Centurion" Williams. Who can resist a guy who waits two thousand years for the girl he loves?

• Companion, Special Mention: Captain Jack Harkness, immortal action hero (and you can define "action" any way you like). Who can resist this guy, period?

• Monsters: The Weeping Angels

• Episode to watch over and over if I could only watch one: “Doomsday” 

Who's Who and What's What: A Selective and Highly Biased Episode Guide

The Ninth Doctor (Christopher Eccleston, 2005)

Primary traveling companion: Rose Tyler (Bille Piper)

The “new” Doctor took some time to find the tone of both the show and its title character. The ninth incarnation of the character invites 19-year-old London shopgirl Rose Tyler along as a traveling companion--the Doctor has “companions” now, not “assistants”--but seems to blow hot and cold about humans as a species. That may be because he's coming to terms with being the last survivor of his own species, the Time Lords of the planet Gallifrey, after the devastating Time War with the Daleks.

To Be Watched

"The Empty Child"/"The Doctor Dances" (Ep. 1-9/1-10), written by Steven Moffat: The Doctor and Rose are confronted by frightening blank-faced mutants in 1941 London. Future showrunner Steven Moffat introduces two of his trademarks in this two-parter: silently terrifying monsters, and the dashing, rarely-silent Time Agent Captain Jack Harkness.

"Dalek" (Ep. 1-6), written by Robert Shearman: This is the first episode to bring classic Who foils into the new series. It goes for the Doctor’s greatest enemies of all, the murderous robotic Daleks, and I think that looking to its history gives the show a sense of itself that its new episodes really haven’t displayed before this.

The Tenth Doctor (David Tennant, 2006-2009)

Primary traveling companions: Rose Tyler (Billie Piper, 2006), Martha Jones (Freema Agyeman, 2007), Donna Noble (Catherine Tate, 2008)

The Tenth Doctor still carries the burden of being the last Time Lord, but it doesn’t seem to weigh quite as heavily. He also has a much higher opinion of humans than the Ninth did, and perhaps that’s why he seems to have more emotional range and depth. He also has a lot of company during his time in the TARDIS--first Rose, then medical student Martha Jones, and finally “just a temp” Donna Noble--but he ends his travels alone. Ten may be the most romantic incarnation of the Doctor to date--not all fans have loved that about him, but I certainly have.

To Be Watched

"Blink" (Ep. 3-10), written by Steven Moffat: This is frequently cited as the Doctor Who episode for people who have never watched Doctor Who before, and although it’s actually relatively short on the Doctor himself, I’m not going to disagree. It’s an excellent stand-alone story with plenty of the show’s hallmarks--a suspenseful story told well, emotional weight, and a truly scary monster (the Weeping Angels)--but very little overt “mythology.” I don’t think it’s possible to watch just one episode of Doctor Who and be done with it, but if that’s what you have to do, you cannot go wrong with this one.

"Army of Ghosts"/"Doomsday" (Ep. 2-12/2-13), written by Russell T. Davies: This two-parter brings back another classic-Who enemy, the Cybermen, and allies them with the Daleks. If that sounds like bad news, it is--and it ends up tearing the Doctor and Rose apart. "Doomsday" is the episode that made me go “all in” with Doctor Who, and if you can watch the last five minutes of it without getting choked up, I will wonder if you are less human than the Doctor himself.

"Human Nature"/"The Family of Blood" (Ep. 3-8/3-9), written by Paul Cornell: The Doctor entrusts Martha with the fob-watch containing his Time Lord memories, and becomes human. Using his standard alias, John Smith, he takes a teaching job at a boarding school and falls in love with the school’s nurse, while mysterious aliens begin preying on the students. This two-parter was recently chosen as the second-best Doctor Who story in a BBC America "superfan" top-10 poll, and I’m inordinately fond of it.

"Silence in the Library"/"Forest of the Dead" (Ep. 4-8/4-9), written by Steven Moffat: This two-parter takes place in the biggest library in the universe, but there’s more than books in its collections. The Doctor almost loses Donna to the monsters that inhabit it, but he finds River Song. The adventurous, gun-slinging archaeologist--Indiana Jones with lots of curly blonde hair, or “hell in high heels”--will become a big part of the Eleventh Doctor’s story, but by saving her life here, the Tenth makes that possible.

"The End of Time," Parts One and Two, written by Russell T. Davies: The “specials” that conclude the era of the Tenth Doctor are full of references and characters from the show’s previous three seasons, in a story where the stakes are as high as they can possibly be. The whole thing does feel a bit overstuffed and indulgent at times, but I appreciate every last minute with my Doctor, and I find this a satisfying farewell.

The Eleventh Doctor (Matt Smith, 2010-2013)

Primary traveling companions; Amelia “Amy” Pond (Karen Gillan) and Rory Williams (Arthur Darvill, 2010-2012), Clara Oswald (Jenna Coleman, 2013--)

The Eleventh Doctor brings back a stronger sense of the Time Lord’s alien nature, and that seems to amplify both his aura of power and sense of fun. There’s a trio in the TARDIS for most of his cycle, as he is joined by the (eventually) married Amy and Rory--this makes for some interesting interpersonal dynamics as we see how his presence affects their relationship. After Amy and Rory leave, Eleven is joined by the mysterious, memorable Clara Oswald, who is expected to stick around for the imminent arrival of the Twelfth Doctor.

To Be Watched

"The Pandorica Opens"/"The Big Bang" (Ep. 5-12/5-13), written by Steven Moffat: This two-part finale to the fifth series features the return of River, the reunion of Amy and Rory, a prison, a wedding (one of my top-five moments of the entire run of Doctor Who), and the rebooting of the universe. Also, “fezzes are cool.” I just love these episodes, but they aren’t ones you can go into unprepared; at least half of this season leads to this.

"The Impossible Astronaut"/"Day of the Moon" (Ep. 6-1 /6-2), written by Steven Moffat: The Doctor, Amy, Rory, and River go to America in two different times. In 1969, they meet President Nixon and help ensure that Apollo 11 happens as planned while trying to learn the identity of a mystery girl in a space suit. In 2011, they will see the Doctor die. This two-parter opener sets out the primary story arc for the sixth series, which carries through the four consecutive episodes “The Rebel Flesh,” “The Almost People,” “A Good Man Goes to War,” and “Let’s Kill Hitler,” and concludes with “The Wedding of River Song.”

"The Name of the Doctor" (Ep. 7-14), written by Steven Moffat: The Doctor’s newest companion, Clara, has been a mystery to him all along. This episode solves that mystery--and opens plenty of other questions, as it sets the stage for the 50th-anniversary special.

"Exploding TARDIS" print skirt

"Vincent and The Doctor" (ep. 5-10), written by Richard Curtis: This episode does not directly lead to anything else in the show's narrative arc. It’s mostly a stand-alone, but this moving story of the Doctor and Amy’s meeting with Vincent Van Gogh does introduce one of the iconic images of “new” Who, the exploding TARDIS. I own two different items of clothing that feature it.

"The Doctor’s Wife" (Ep. 6-4), written by Neil Gaiman: I submit this stand-alone episode exploring the Doctor’s relationship with the TARDIS as Exhibit A of Doctor Who as a writer’s show--Gaiman is a lifelong fan, and he so enjoyed writing for it that he did it again a year later.

Related Reading and References: 

The Doctor Who pages at TVTropes.org

BBC America: Doctor Who

BBC One: Doctor Who

(NOTE: It was brought to my attention that the last couple of pieces I did for my writing workshop referenced Doctor Who rather heavily, but didn’t make allowances for readers who might have no idea what those references meant. As the portion of the world that does get those references gears up to celebrate the Doctor’s 50th anniversary this week--as if a half-century means anything to a thousand-year-old Time Lord!--it seems like an appropriate occasion to address that. These posts are not sponsored by anything other than my own excessive enthusiasm for Doctor Who. Some photos via BBC America: Doctor Who at 50 and BBC One.)

Read More

Wordless Wednesday: Who's Who, Family Style

I managed to tie our Wordless Wednesday Linky Group prompt for this week, "Family," into my celebration of Doctor Who's 50th anniversary.

The Doctor and His Wife, Wondercon 2013

Read More

A Fan(girl)'s Notes: DOCTOR WHO, Part 1 of 2--A Brief Personal History of Time (Lord)

(NOTE: It was brought to my attention that the last couple of pieces I did for my writing workshop referenced Doctor Who rather heavily, but didn’t make allowances for readers who might have no idea what those references meant. As the portion of the world that does get those references gears up to celebrate the Doctor’s 50th anniversary this week--as if a half-century means anything to a thousand-year-old Time Lord!--it seems like an appropriate occasion to address that. These posts are not sponsored by anything other than my own excessive enthusiasm for Doctor Who. Some photos via the BBC Doctor Who Shop.)

One Saturday evening about three and a half years ago, I wandered into the family room to find my husband watching Doctor Who. I joined him on the sofa, and we were both intrigued by the story quickly (and just as quickly annoyed by BBC America’s inopportune commercial breaks). Both of us had some basic knowledge of the character and the premise, but neither of us had ever really spent much time watching the show before--I had attempted it during the early 1980s, when some PBS stations began importing the series from England, but couldn’t get past the cheap sets and cheaper special effects back then.

Those things are not obstacles with the more recent years of the series, but that’s only a small part of why we are now genuine “New Whovians,” fans who came to Doctor Who after the show was re-launched in 2005 and have seen every episode since then (thanks to a lot of binge viewing to make up for being a few years late).

Getting to Know Who

Given my devotion to the Doctor, you may be surprised to learn that I’m such a relative newbie. We came to Doctor Who near the end of Matt Smith’s first series as the Eleventh Doctor--we were captivated, but understandably confused. However, British TV seasons are relatively short (usually 12-14 episodes) and spaced months apart, so we’d have time to catch up on previous seasons on DVD before the next one began. But first we’d have to decide just how far “previous” we wanted to go--back five years, or twenty-five, or all the way? The show started back in 1963(!).

We chose not to go all the way back to the beginning. We didn’t even go back to the “new” beginning right away--we started with the Tenth Doctor, David Tennant, figuring that would lead back into the place where we planned to pick up and continue. (We backtracked to the first “new Who” series, with Christopher Eccleston’s Ninth Doctor, just this year.) The transition from Ten to Eleven coincided with more changes in the show’s storytelling and visual feel than what ordinarily follows a recast, as the show-runner’s reins passed from Russell T. Davies to Steven Moffat at the same time, but even so, I think we made a good call.

BBC America has been running a monthly series of specials called “The Doctors Revisited” throughout 2013 in preparation for the show's 50th anniversary; each one focuses on a different Doctor and his era of the show, followed by one of his most significant stories. We watched all of the documentaries and nearly all of the featured episodes--we couldn't make it all the way through the Sixth Doctor story, but we liked most of the others, cheap sets and all. I understand more about where the show came from and how it developed now than I did a year ago, and I have more insight into how the new version honors the old. But I still don't feel any need to go further into the older shows--I'm fine with what I've already seen. I appreciate that Doctor Who has an extensive history, and I also appreciate that it’s accessible at nearly any point during that history.

The casting changes can be a good opportunity to get started with Doctor Who; whenever a new actor takes over the role, the show adjusts its footing and re-establishes itself a bit. That can offer the new viewer an easier way into its world--you may feel less like you’re walking into the middle of something. Most fans tend to have a special fondness for their first Doctor--whoever was in the role when they began watching--which is why many long-time American fans are still likely to claim Tom Baker’s Fourth Doctor as “theirs.” Maybe that attachment is even stronger when you and your Doctor start out together. (With the time of the Twelfth Doctor soon to begin, some new fans will have the chance to find that out for themselves.)

I don’t think that attachment should keep you from getting acquainted with the Doctors who came before yours, though, or make you hold back from those who come later. The beauty of the Doctor is that he is always the Doctor, in every form he takes, so it’s really okay to call more than one of them “yours.” My first Doctor, technically, is the Eleventh, but since we came into his first series three-fourths of the way through and we re-watched it all later, after we’d seen the full run of the Tenth Doctor, I count Ten as my first Doctor. And I can absolutely vouch for that special fondness for one’s first Doctor, even though mine was done being the Doctor by the time I got to know him. 

A Brief History of Who

The very first episode of Doctor Who aired on BBC One on November 23, 1963. The Doctor was a Time Lord from the planet Gallifrey who wandered across time and space with various “assistants”--mostly women, sometimes men, usually humans--in a vehicle called the TARDIS (an acronym for Time And Relative Dimension In Space), which was surprisingly roomy inside for something that appeared to be the size and shape of a phone booth from the outside. The serialized episodes blended science and historical fiction with thoroughly contemporary elements, and the show quickly became beloved by British audiences. The low-budget production values didn’t seem to prevent viewers from being drawn in by the well-crafted stories and engaging characters. From the beginning, Doctor Who emphasized the writing, and even today, an episode’s writer is the only person other than the stars to get a credit in the show’s opening-title sequence.

The show was so popular that producers faced a quandary when William Hartnell, the actor who originated the role of the Doctor, wanted to leave, and they addressed it rather creatively--they recast the part, and then called attention to the change by giving the Doctor the ability to “regenerate” into a new physical form. This alone is a huge reason that the character has carried on for so long--at Christmas 2013, the Doctor will regenerate for the twelfth time. Every version of the Doctor has an appearance, traits and quirks that make him unique from the rest, but there’s never been any question that all of them are the same character.

By the late 1970s, the role had changed hands for the fourth time, and

Tom Baker’s Doctor was the first version that most Americans met, as the show began airing on some PBS and independent stations. (Baker played the Doctor for longer than anyone else, and his long, multicolored scarf is an iconic bit of pop culture--even people who know little about the show seem to know that prop is associated with Doctor Who.) But it was hard to find on TV, and thanks to poor reception in some places (and those low production values), hard to watch even if you did find it. The emergence of home video helped expand the audience through the 1980s and ‘90s, however--and by then, that was all there was. The BBC ended production of Doctor Who in 1989, after seven actors had played the title role.

Despite his absence, fans remained loyal to the Doctor, gathering to share their love and keep the legend alive at conventions like Los Angeles’ long-running Gallifrey One. Independent audio productions and tie-in novels continued to feature the Doctor and friends in new stories, and an American TV movie brought him back for a one-night-only appearance in 1995 (a one-shot Eighth Doctor, in a pilot attempt that didn’t take), but for the most part, the Time Lord was part of the past.

By the turn of the 21st century, Doctor Who had been off the air for over a decade. Its original audience had grown up, and some of them were working in television--and they wanted the Doctor there, too. Under the creative direction of Russell T. Davies, Doctor Who returned to the BBC in 2005, and came to America via the SciFi Channel some months later. (It later moved to BBC America.) The show had a new look and storytelling style, but the reboot was in touch with its roots. There would be blanks to fill in after sixteen years away, but this was clearly the continuation of a story that began more than forty years earlier.

Thanks to modern technology and the BBC’s increased international presence, more and more people have come to know and love the Doctor since his return to TV. For the last couple of years, the BBC has aired new episodes on the same day in the UK and US, and the 50th-anniversary special, “The Day of the Doctor,” will be simulcast worldwide this Saturday, November 23. Now that’s an adventure in space and time!

NEXT TIME: Playing Favorites with the Doctor: A Selected and Highly Subjective Episode Guide

Read More

From the (Writing) Workshop: It's In The Bag!

This was the exercise:

Empty your purse, backpack, briefcase, or shopping bag and look at what you've  taken out.  Now choose one or two or more objects that say something significant to and/or  about you. Describe them. How are they related? How are they not? This is an exercise in three things.  The first is your powers of description. Second is your ability to analyze, to move from the concrete to the abstract, to see the patterns (or lack of same) in things that seem unrelated. The third is your ability to play with words and ideas.

I took the assignment more literally than my classmates did, and I think I succeeded more at “play” than “analysis,” but I was surprised by how much fun I had doing this. I'm doing some assigned revisions on it for class tonight, but here's what I came up with before I was given further instructions.

I actively avoid physically writing things down--I have several apps on my iPhone that will let me make notes I can actually decipher when I need them--but I always make sure I have a pen and notebook with me, just in case. I bought the ones I’m currently using at Book Soup about six months ago--although given what I just confessed, “using” is probably not the right word. It may be more accurate to say I’m keeping them on retainer.

The notebook is 4 x 6 inches, which is small enough to fit easily into a pocket in my bag but wide enough that writing in it doesn’t feel cramped. That is, it looks like it wouldn’t feel cramped--since I haven’t actually written anything in it yet, I’m just speculating on that. The heavyweight pages are lined but otherwise blank, and the blue, bound cardboard cover has a woven, fabric-like texture. The pen I keep with the notebook is a brown, plastic, retractable ballpoint called The Seven Year Pen. The manufacturer says it has a larger ink supply than standard pens, which should allow most writers to get seven years’ use of it. Since I’m not actually writing very much with mine, I think it may have better odds of drying out--or getting lost--during those seven years than it does of being used up.

My wallet lies on the other end of the use spectrum--it’s in and out of my bag and opened and closed multiple times a day--so I’m afraid it’ll break or wear out much sooner than I want it to. I’d like it to last at least as long as that pen, though--I’m quite fond of it and I don’t know how easily I could find another just like it. It’s more like a card case than a proper wallet, really. It’s comparable in size to my iPhone--just as wide, not as long, and roughly twice as thick--and it doesn’t hold quite as much, but since it gives a home to my ID, insurance cards, and money (paper, plastic, and sometimes metal), it’s just as essential. It’s a hard plastic clamshell with a six-pocket flexible plastic insert to hold the cards, and its construction is sturdier than those cheap materials might suggest. The only thing wrong with it is the color--it’s nearly black. and it should be blue. Both sides of the case are embossed with Doctor Who’s TARDIS, and everyone knows that the Doctor travels in a blue box. It’s otherwise true to its namesake, though. It holds more than you’d think--it’s bigger on the inside!--and it holds what I need, no matter where in time and space I am.

It doesn’t hold the notebook or the pen, though. It’s not quite that big on the inside. Then again, I don’t really use either the notebook or the pen, so how much do I need them? Apparently, not nearly as much as I think I need a TARDIS.

Read More

WW: Friends

At my nephews' birthday parties, friends and family are interchangeable.

Celebrating 10 years of Joey D, Summer 2013
photo by Aunt Nina

Read More

(Audio)Book Talk: COLUMBINE, by Dave Cullen

Columbine

Dave Cullen

Audiobook read by Don Leslie

Grand Central Publishing (2010), trade paper (ISBN 0446546925 / 9780446546928)

Nonfiction (current affairs), 464 pages

Source: Purchased audiobook (Blackstone Audio (2009), ISBN 9781433290466; Audible ASIN B0025ZAMU6)

Reason for reading: Personal

Opening lines: “He told them he loved them. Each and every one of them. He spoke without notes but chose his words carefully. Frank DeAngelis waited out the pom-pom routines, the academic awards, and the student-made videos. After an hour of revelry, the short, middle-aged man strode across the gleaming basketball court to address his student body. He took his time. He smiled as he passed the marching band, the cheerleaders, and the Rebels logo painted beneath flowing banners proclaiming recent sports victories. He faced two thousand hyped-up high school students in the wooden bleachers and they gave him their full attention. Then he told them how much they meant to him. How his heart would break to lose just one of them.”

Book description, from the publisher’s website:On April 20, 1999, two boys left an indelible stamp on the American psyche. Their goal was simple: to blow up their school, Oklahoma-City style, and to leave "a lasting impression on the world." Their bombs failed, but the ensuing shooting defined a new era of school violence-irrevocably branding every subsequent shooting "another Columbine."

When we think of Columbine, we think of the Trench Coat Mafia; we think of Cassie Bernall, the girl we thought professed her faith before she was shot; and we think of the boy pulling himself out of a school window--the whole world was watching him. Now, in a riveting piece of journalism nearly ten years in the making, comes the story none of us knew. In this revelatory book, Dave Cullen has delivered a profile of teenage killers that goes to the heart of psychopathology. He lays bare the callous brutality of mastermind Eric Harris, and the quavering, suicidal Dylan Klebold, who went to prom three days earlier and obsessed about love in his journal.

The result is an astonishing account of two good students with lots of friends, who came to stockpile a basement cache of weapons, to record their raging hatred, and to manipulate every adult who got in their way. They left signs everywhere, described by Cullen with a keen investigative eye and psychological acumen. Drawing on hundreds of interviews, thousands of pages of police files, FBI psychologists, and the boys’ tapes and diaries, he gives the first complete account of the Columbine tragedy.

Comments:  In April of 1999, my son Chris was a freshman in a large suburban high school. Most of the students came from solidly middle-class homes, and there was a strong evangelical-Christian presence in the community. We were well over a thousand miles from Jefferson County, Colorado, but the surface similarities made it hard not to think that what happened at Columbine High could just as easily happen at Germantown. I think my cohort--parents of the classes of 1999 through 2002 at every high school in America--was particularly spooked by Columbine. As we followed the story, we hoped we’d learn that there was something unique to that place that factored into the “why” of it...and that might mean our kids, in their own high schools, would be safe.

Journalist Dave Cullen was at Columbine High School on the day of the massacre, and stayed with the story for nearly a decade. As he dug into the evidence released in the years following the shootings, researching the details of that day and what brought it about, he discovered that while early reports got most of the facts right, they spun them into erroneous, but persistent, conclusions about the killers’ backgrounds and motives. In Columbine, he pulls his findings together into a revealing, insightful, and gripping narrative that closely examines and debunks nearly all of the most prominent “myths,” including:

• “Jocks, minorities or Christians were targeted. False.
• “The killing went on for hours. False. It lasted 16 minutes.
• “Eric Harris killed Dylan Klebold. False. Chapter 52, ‘Quiet,’ depicts the actual suicide, and presents the forensic evidence to back it up.
• “Christian martyr Cassie Bernall's last act was a gunpoint profession of faith. False. Chapter 38, ‘Martyr’ describes the truth of what happened in the library, and how the confusion with another victim developed. (Other aspects of the storyline unfold in additional chapters.)
• “The Trench Coat Mafia. Nearly everything about this barely-existent band is false. Chapter 28, ‘Media Crime,’ explains how this one emerged."

Links, scans, and indices to nearly 30,000 pages of official evidence, a selective bibliography, and other background material are posted as an “online companion” to Columbine, and it would be easy to lose days going down the rabbit hole of Cullen’s extensive research, although most readers probably won’t feel like they need--or want--to do that. The story is told pretty thoroughly in Cullen’s award-winning book. He covers the chronology of the day (sometimes in unsettlingly graphic detail), follows the police investigation, and provides detailed portraits of victims, survivors, and their families. He discusses the effects of trauma on memory and the unreliability of eyewitnesses as he explores how some of those stubborn myths took hold.

But Columbine’s greatest significance rests in its insights into the psychological makeup of teenage killers Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. Through excerpts from both boys’ journals and the analysis of psychologists who studied them after the event, Cullen reveals that their depiction as social outcasts or victims of bullying was one of the many things the media got wrong. Klebold’s journals make it obvious that he had serious and untreated clinical depression--if he was victimized by anyone, it was himself. Meanwhile, Harris is pegged as, quite literally, a textbook psychopath* with a grandiose plan of destruction; his portrait is utterly chilling (and reminded me a lot of the title character in We Need to Talk About Kevin; that novel predates Columbine, but it makes me think Lionel Shriver must have done some pretty good research herself). 

(*There's actually a psychopathy checklist, and as FBI analysts reviewed the documents Harris left behind, they were able to check off more and more boxes on it.)

Much of what's revealed in Columbine is made public for the first time in these pages, and it makes clear that what happened at Columbine High happened because of the individuals involved, and wasn’t precipitated by anything specific to their circumstances. I’m not sure there are many larger lessons we can take away from that--none that might help us feel a little better about our kids’ safety, anyway. Readers looking for reassurance that “Columbine can’t happen here” aren’t likely to find it, but they will end with a much better understanding of what really happened there.

One of the many ways that audiobooks have improved my reading life is that they’ve helped me get to some of the books that have been hanging around my TBR collection for years. I bought Columbine when it was released in paperback in 2010...and it’s sat on the shelf ever since (surviving the Big Book Purge of 2013). I thought about finally cracking it open late last year, after the Sandy Hook school shootings, but went with the audio of a thematically-related novel that had been in TBR even longer, We Need to Talk About Kevin; instead. But as my reading preferences have been shifting more toward nonfiction lately, I decided to make Columbine my next audio read (after Sheri Fink’s Five Days At Memorial). I’m not sorry I did--I wasn’t wowed by Don Leslie’s reading, but I wasn’t bothered by it either--but the standard tag that Audible applies at the end of every recording, “Audible hopes you have enjoyed this program,” doesn’t feel right with a book like this. Columbine isn’t a book you read for “enjoyment”--you read it for insight, for context, and for stellar narrative journalism. And if those things matter to you, you should read it.

Rating: Book--4 of 5; Audio--3.75 of 5

Other reviews, via the Book Blogs Search Engine

Sue Klebold’s (Dylan’s mother) essay for O Magazine, 10 years after Columbine

Read More