celebrity is as celebrity does

I watched the majority of the Oscars last night because I've fallen in love with a film I actually have yet to see:  The King's Speech.  I love Colin Firth.  I love Helena Bonham Carter.  I love Geoffrey Rush.  Put them all together?  Yes, please.  I wanted to make sure they won as much as possible, so I stayed up.  (I ended up getting even less sleep than planned due to thunderstorms and my well-meaning but incompetent cat who just cannot kill mice.  Is there anything more silly or surreal than chasing a rodent around the house at midnight?)

With all these stars of the screen winning awards and praising each other, I thought about why I cared at all.  It's not like Colin is my best friend, but I wanted him to win.  Even if I met him, I'd be one of thousands-perhaps millions-of fans.  What is a fan?  Not a friend, not even an acquaintance.

It seems to me that the internet and its children, social networking and MMORPG, get unfairly pinned with the de-socialization of our society.  I would argue that with the worship and affinity for celebrities, we've been having fictitious relationships for quite some time now via television and magazines.  On that note, I remember reading about adolescent girls and their teenage heartthrobs; the point was simply this, too much attention paid to Leo DiCaprio distracts a girl from the real, in-the-flesh boys her own age.  She risks missing that opportunity to socialize and learn and experience something far better than kissing a poster.   I can't remember where I read this though.  Maybe Seventeen?  Well, maybe not...magazines like that were built on celebrity crushes, so why would they publish a statement of that sort?

Perhaps my own affection for celebrity stems from a need to get back into the thick of "it," in New York or any other city.  (Just get me out of the country, please!)  I did spot the occasional famous face in Manhattan, which gave me this oddly satisfying thought "They are real!"  But so is my boyfriend, and my family.  They're real too...more real to me than any face on a screen.  

meditations on a career fair

These are the misadventures of a liberal arts girl in the heartland of the vocational and financial...

I suppose I should lay out the preconceived notions and fears I had prior to this little venture.  I have never before visited a career fair.  Which seems odd, given there were plenty at Ohio State.  Again my fatal flaw of rolling the dice and going on my own.  So I wondered what it would mean for me, especially after so much artsy schooling, to visit with hiring staff from insurance companies, financial institutions and corporations.  Would I be laughed out of the room?  My resume is tailored to catch the museum eye...and I might just get confirmation that I've lost all ability to impress.  I might get confirmation that my resume is crap.  I might be the only Gen Y in the room (pretty darn close, it turns out), and I might not look good enough.

I wondered who goes to these sorts of things?  I was a little surprised to feel some shame.  Like the unemployed and under-employed are vocational lepers.  I never imagined myself in this position of helplessness.  And I never wanted evidence that it is of my own doing flung in my face.  Even though I have never attained any semblance of status, I felt the absence of it.  Very strange.

Now this fair was a lot smaller than those I had seen on the news.  Maybe around a dozen tables.  Of course, more could have come after I left.  I was yet again reminded of the specter of education...or rather, re-education...by the presence of three career colleges.  And I call them that to differentiate from the 4-year liberal arts system that seems to be so demonized these days.  Like people who study history and art don't want careers?  Sheesh.  They're running a pretty nice racket, getting people to go back to school for every little change in their career path.  I guess I'm an oddball for thinking enough is enough when it comes to student debt.  So I was a fish out of water.  But I had my spiel:  branching out to the private sector, offering my administrative and organizational and computer skills.  I even have some sales and customer service under my belt.

So why deny me "entry" (in the figurative sense) to this world of "career"?

Nobody actually flinched when I said "art" or "non-profit."  Good sign.  One lady seemed to deem all my experience in museums collectively as an internship.  Like I had no valuable training from those years.  Bad sign.  This I find interesting, and I would have to go to many more fairs to say anything definitive, but the woman was far less receptive to me than men at other tables.  Curious.

What I got out of this was some confirmation of my previous employment lamentations:  1. Every HR person has his/her own prejudices, and you cannot please everyone (without lying), 2. I will never rid myself of my prejudice against financial institutions even if I work for one and drive myself slowly insane, and 3. I just cannot seem to get along with middle-aged women.

Aren't we all hard-working Americans?

All right, I suppose I understand that all government expenditures are under a harsh lens these days...but can Congress really shut down PBS and NPR?  I've heard that NPR's income, though partly Federal funding, is largely from private donations.  You know, their tag line is "this program was made possible by viewers like you."  That counts as acknowledging taxpayers as much as donors, in my view.

I'm really concerned that institutions like these as well as museums and non-profits are the first on the chopping block.  Isn't there a number out there circulating that such funding makes up maybe 10% of the Federal budget?  And then there's teachers, who, unlike Saturday-night babysitters, earn on average $1.24 per child per hour.  And these are the first cuts?  Sheesh.

I should know by now that not everyone has the same priorities as I do.  And not everyone thinks of the world in the same way.  I quickly learned that "grown-ups" don't always get it right.  I find it really sad that I have to be surrounded by like-minded "young people" to be taken seriously.  Even then, I'm not sure I wow people the way I used to.  I may have little tidbits of prestige on the resume, but for some, even Columbia doesn't impress.  In terms of art history, it should be hallowed for Meyer Shapiro, who earned the first doctorate in the field.  Some just shrug it off.  (One in particular I am pretty sure was just trying to sleight me...and it worked)

None of this is really connected, unless you count the issue of prestige when deciding which jobs count and which do not.  Teachers should be pretigious, as well as other "cultural workers" out there in libraries and museums that make the world a little less stark.  Even though it isn't only good old boys now, it seems there is still a secret kabal of good old boys and girls that won't let me in.  Not that I want in.  I just want to make a career and a living without fearfully wondering if the majority of Americans think my career choices are worthless.

Without even having a "first career" unless you count internships and temporary posts, I seem to have been redirected like so many other Americans...but without decades of income behind me.  I feel like I'm in limbo.  Maybe I'm being directed to less of an arts-themed career and more of a service one (although I still don't see much difference...), and my latest attempt to organize a Heifer Project event is a sign pointing in that direction.  I'll serve...but I can't volunteer for the rest of my life.  And apparently I'm too educated to be a shop girl.  Dang it.

what is merit? or, how I would like to bitch slap my high school guidance counselor

So I had a random memory today of my physical therapist, Vitaly.  During the usual chitchat that I assume was supposed to distract me from the painful and tiring processes, he told me that a lot of younger trainers and therapists were getting not only Masters degrees but also Doctorates.  And those with the most schooling, no matter how green, were favored for employment.  Over those with more experience, yet "lower" degrees due to the fact that a Doctorate didn't exist when they were in school.

Well, if only it worked that way for me.  I'd like somebody, just one employer, to overlook a few things in favor of arbitrary information.

How am I supposed to keep up with all of these HR prejudices that seem to contradict one another?  They want good schools, but also lots of experience.  They want responsible employees, but shy away from advanced degrees.  It all seems designed to force me to lie, and that's something I really don't want to do.  I don't want to pretend I already live in Philadelphia, or that I didn't go to graduate school.

Of course I'm assuming that the people with whom I am competing are playing fair.  And I have a sneaking suspicion that they aren't.  To fail and preserve my character, or to win by selling my soul?  That is the question.

I know for sure by now that all my "hard work" in grade school means bupkis.  Not even the whole "it shows you can start something and complete it" bit doesn't satisfy me.  So the existential crisis continues for a third year...what is this life about?

give me a job

A facebook friend posted this a week or two ago:  "what should you value more in a professional experience: quality, or "quantity", that is, length of commitment? is it just my generation, or are most people always looking for a better, more interesting, or just more convenient way to earn their living and enjoy their work?"


Of course the reading of this reminded me of how I am racked with guilt over being one of those Generation Y losers who haven't stayed at one place of employment for multiple, continuous years.  I try to justify, and think over the reasons why I have not stayed.  Well, I suppose it began with college.  I worked summer only.  Then work-study at the Columbus museum came along, interrupted by an internship in D.C.  I did go back to Columbus, yet I doubt that counts as continuity.  Then graduation...and work-study ended and the museum had no place for me.  I volunteered for a few months, worked retail for a few more, then got back into the old Development office for a few months.  Then I had the awesome idea to go to graduate school.  Ooops?  More work-study, but there wasn't enough work to last past May both years.  Summer jobs.  Unpaid internships.  Volunteering.  Substitute teaching.  2010 Census.  Then finishing the last 4 months of the Zanesville museum's education grant.


I want to know, quite simply and unequivocally, does the past decade of my life make me ineligible to work for a living?


Because it was all supposed to do the opposite.

critical thinking

I remember it from the corners of grade school textbooks:  "Critical Thinking," a section of the chapter most often ignored (to all students' relief) for the more palatable multiple choice questions and bullet points.  In a recent conversation, though, it came to me that the lack of critical thinking is at the root of almost every stagnated argument.  Why weren't we encouraged as children to practice that most important of skills?  To listen and learn, but not to take anything for granted, for gospel.  Analyze.  Criticize.  Think.

For example, during my time homebound with my father, I have often run into political and ideological stalemate.  I have often lamented the whole "us versus them" trope that makes everything so black and white, life and death.  All I hear pertaining to Muslims and mosques is parroted from the latest Fox News program, filled with emotional fallacy and hatred and fear.  Any disagreement on my part is often met with harsh words...or at least they felt harsh to me.  To disagree is not to be narrow-minded, or insolent, or aggressive.  I do admit to being "aggressive" on New York subways, if indeed looking into someone's eye is an act of war, but I just can't not look, you know?  And I just can't not voice my opinions and observations.

The thing is, it is ungratifying to say the least when saying my part does not propel us into meaningful dialogue.  Who wants to be shut down with a curt "No, you're wrong"?  Even children don't accept that crap.  They ask why.  And grownups scramble for some watered-down explanation of sex or pregnancy or profanity.  It is our natural instinct to question and explore.

So why am I seeing all these signs appearing to say "Don't question" and "Don't think"?  If you want to contradict me, come up with something better than "No."

Just now, reading the book Heaven, I came across a Muslim scholar fighting against the lack of critical thinking within Islam itself.  What Americans might consider Islam is in fact an overly literal, Puritanical interpretation that forbids all questions.  An "uncritical adherence" to the Qur'an.  Sound familiar?  These "Puritans" ignore history and cultural context and foster the ideas that lead young Muslims to terrorism.  Of course, this is a simplification...read the book.  But either way, it tells me that I've been onto something, because I see uncritical adherence in many religions and ideologies.

So to put it critically, people have been asking the wrong question:  it's not which religion is the right path (a nice, simple either/or that many are comfortable with) but how does religion lead us down the path?

Reject the literal, forget the grade school adherence to whatever the teacher tells you.  Think for yourself.  It's nothing new, but it sure could solve a lot of new problems.

censored

I've been meaning to post "A Fire in My Belly," the video that was recently pulled from an exhibition at the National Portrait Gallery.  (Unfortunately the library is blocking YouTube...go figure)  I want to post it to show my support for the museum and artists everywhere who battle censorship.  I also want to praise the Wexner Center for displaying the "banned" video that has certain stuffy lawmakers threatening the Smithsonian's funding.

It's not my place to explain the video or its relevance.  I will say that these lawmakers and religious officials have fallen into one of the booby traps of contemporary art.  You should never let yourself be fooled by the first glance, by one moment among many in an entire video loop, and fail to examine the issue that is the artist's true subject.  So, Right Wing, you have been duped into a false sense of superiority and righteous indignation, when the indignation is truly and rightfully directed at you and all who ignore the suffering of others. You are the ants crawling around, ignorant of the importance of other issues.

So let the video make you feel revulsion and disgust, and then ask yourself "why do I feel this?"  Don't stop watching, don't reply to me with religious damnation.  Keep watching and think about the issues.  Think about the analogy of Christ suffering amid intolerance and scorn to the suffering of millions of HIV and AIDS patients, also amid intolerance and scorn.

This video is not anti-religion or anti-Christian.  It is, however, pro-human.  Think about that.