Hallway to Nowhere

  • Which America?

    Which America?

    I’ve been thinking about the two very different views of America offered at the debate last night. Trump and Clinton paint radically different pictures of the world around us, and I believe this reflects their constituencies, as well. This is important, because the debate was not just about politics. It was about which America we are going to inhabit, that of Trump or that Clinton.

    The America of Trump is, quite frankly, a frightening place. I saw it described in an op-ed piece in the NYT as the “Republican Party’s Apocalypse Now.” Trump talks about a bankrupt America that is failing in so many ways that he can’t enumerate them, a place where gangs of criminal immigrants stalk the streets, and African Americans and Hispanics live in dire straits in our inner cities. He speaks of the need for law and order, for stop and frisk policing. Our allies are uncertain (because they don’t pay their fair share of the burden); our enemies, many, and our best hope lies in retreating behind a strong physical border and barricading ourselves from the rest of the world. We can only measure our strength by our net worth (money), and right now America’s value is at an all-time low. If you were to make a film of Trump’s America, it would have to be in black and white, with strong noir qualitites.

    Clinton’s America is not nearly so bleak. Race IS an issue-it will always be an issue, I’m afraid-but there is hope that we will be able to make progress by working together to tackle that. In response to the dire picture of the African American community painted by Trump, Clinton countered by  saying that strength of the black churches and of movements like BLM show its vitality instead.  She said that she would work to empower the middle and working class, fund clean power, and rebuild the infra-structure. She spoke to reassure our allies, who might justifiably be made nervous at the thought of an America that would cease honoring treaties and alliances on the whim of a unstable President.

    Trump, should he be elected, will not have unlimited power. He will not be a dictator, only POTUS. But he WILL get to decide quite a bit, including the nomination of one or more (probably more) U.S. Supreme Court Judges. Clinton, the same. You need to think carefully about which America you want to dwell in, and choose accordingly. For me, it comes down to choosing hope. I go with Clinton.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • The Debate

    The Debate

    I have to address the debate. I streamed it from the NYT. I wanted to have an actual debate party, maybe with drinking involved (not on my part, as I don’t imbibe), but all my friends who would be eagerly watching are either located elsewhere or coupled. I did try to do it by phone, but the acoustics set up a feedback, so we disconnected. I’m sure we’ll go over the debate this weekend, though. Anyway. here goes:

    The bar was set much differently for each candidate from the start. Trump would be applauded if he just didn’t implode, melt down, show his abysmal ignorance of any real political information, or walk off the stage in a huff. For Clinton, though, the expectations were different. She was supposed to somehow transform herself into someone that you’d want to make your BFF, feel warm and fuzzy about, show her compassionate side, etc. The moderator had to rein both political animals in, when they got rowdy.

    Trump started off the debate in a somewhat subdued manner-for Trump. That is to say, he was only speaking in a normal tone, though he was still almost loud as he spoke about trade. He employed his usual tactics of deflection often and rarely seemed to answer the question he had been asked, something that Clinton called him on. He interrupted Clinton, spoke over her, and shook his head. Later in the debate he reverted to classic Trump, blustery and full of self-praise for his own temperament, criticizing Clinton’s stamina and saying how good his relations with the African Americans were. He exited on weirdly back-handed threat of what he could have said about Clinton and her family-but didn’t. Factually, he espoused about what you’d expect: the birther lie ( that Hillary was responsible for the whole birther campaign);  that he opposed the war in Iraq before it began; that NATO never opposed terrorism until Trump brought to their attention; Ford is leaving the US; Clinton is responsible for ISIS; there are more. Listening to him last night, most of what I heard was MONEY MONEY MONEY….with a little Law-N-Order thrown in for good measure. But running a country is about so much more that dollars. It’s about government and politics and people and history, not to mention OTHER COUNTRIES. Trump failed to convince me that he has anything near the ability necessary to lead the US last night.

    Clinton. For the most part, she kept her cool. She was restrained, factual, and actually answered the questions she was asked. But, unlike Trump, Clinton has experience at debates and knows what she is about. The contrast between the two was glaring. Trump said once during the debate that it was “all sound-bites” in reference to Clinton’s replies, but in truth, that is all that TRUMP provided, as he gave little of substance and much of what sounded good.  He told the audience they could go to Hillary’s website and read her positions-have you ever been to TRUMP’S site? No positions, just videos-with sound-bites! He tried to attack her on stamina; she came back with a stinging reminder of her schedule as Secretary of State and followed it up with an attack on his remarks on women. She started out mild but in the end did what the moderator should have been doing-calling him out. She showed herself to be fierce and not to trifled with-good job!

    Will the debate change anything, though? Trump was clearly playing to his core constituency-white uneducated male (with some female) voters whom he hopes will sweep him into the White house. This group is what I term “true believers” and sometimes I think that they are so mesmerized by Trump that they just don’t care what he does. Confront them with words from his own mouth confirming that he has lied again and again-doesn’t matter;  show lawsuits, bankruptcies, debt -doesn’t matter; he professes admiration for the leader of Russia, a ruthless dictator-doesn’t matter.  What does matter is that he exudes strength, promises to make the country great (again), and seems to be an outsider in a political system that many view with suspicion. Clinton, by offering us a politically savvy opponent who had actual facts at her command, had to reach the voters who were wondering, “why her?” If watching this debate didn’t clarify THAT issue, then I shake my head. I’ve got more to say on the debate and the vision of America presented by each of the candidates, but that will be an issue for another time.

  • Fates And Traitors: A Novel Of John Wilkes Booth By Jennifer Chiaverini-A Review

    Fates And Traitors: A Novel Of John Wilkes Booth By Jennifer Chiaverini-A Review

    Fates and Traitors recreates the story of one of America’s most famous men-John Wilkes Booth-through a skillful portrayal of four women surrounding him. As we follow Mary Ann Booth (his mother), Asia Booth (his sister), Lucy Hale (the woman he courted), and Mary Surratt (his supporter and Confederate sympathizer), we come to know Booth himself as he grows to manhood, becomes an actor, and eventually assassinates President Lincoln. The book shows a man gripped by an obsessive fixation on Lincoln as a means of solving, on way or another, the problems faced by the South at the end of the Civil War. He deceives those he loves in the employment of the Cause, with the bitter and tragic result that history records.  A good read, especially for any of you Civil War buffs! (On a personal note: when I was an undergrad working my first library job, one of my co-workers was a descendant of Dr. Mudd. He was most insistent that Dr. Mudd was innocent and had treated Booth not knowing what he had done. Very interesting fellow.)

  • Manitou Canyon By William Kent Krueger-A Review

    Manitou Canyon By William Kent Krueger-A Review

    Autumn seems the perfect setting for the latest (#15) Cork O’Connor book from William Kent Krueger. I like my settings to correspond, and so when I’m reading a novel that is set in the fall in a mountainous region, and I’M living in a mountainous region in the fall, it makes me oddly happy. Add to this that I read his previous book at this same time last year, and my OCD pattern yearnings are really satisfied! These things aside, the book is well worth reading, both as a stand-alone thriller but especially if you follow the series. There is a fast-paced plot with some interesting turns and twists. The characters that have appeared in previous O’Connor novels are here, plus a few new additions that we might be seeing later. The way Krueger writes about Minnesota’s Northwoods is itself reason enough to read his books-he truly makes the landscape an integral part of the story, and indeed it is part of the plot. This is a great book to take to bed as the leaves fall and the nights grow cooler!

  • Why I Won’t Change My Anti-Depressants

    Why I Won’t Change My Anti-Depressants

    I recently learned that I have microscopic colitis, specifically collagenous colitis. Upon doing some research into the subject, it seems that SSRIs and SNRIs might aggravate and possible even be a causative factor of this inflammatory bowel disease. Over the years I have taken SSRIs and SNRIs to help combat depression, with the SNRIs proving most effective, along with the atypical Remeron. Right now I’m on a relatively low dose of Cymbalta. I think it helps with my mood but wouldn’t be enough by itself to stop me from descending into the stygian depths. But it does double-duty, helping with the muscle and joint pains of fibromyalgia. And it does these things very effectively, with little side effects. To keep me stable and from severe depression, I rely upon Remeron, an atypical anti-depressant. This helps me sleep and provides the heavy duty lift that Cymbalta can’t. I ‘ve been on it for several years and keep my fingers crossed that it will continue to work, b/c it is THE “go-to” medication for severe and recalcitrant depression, which mine was. This regimen is my maintenance and my lifeline. I remember what life used to be before I found meds that worked, and it was literally a life not worth living. Every day I wanted to die. I would have killed myself, but that required more effort that I could muster, one, and two, I felt sure that I was so stupid I would bungle the job and be left in a state even worse than the one I was currently in. This was despite the efforts of excellent psychiatrists (back when psychiatrists still did therapy) and eventually even ECT. The ECT made me forget for a while, but the depression returned again and again. I was put on a stronger drug regimen, had hospitalizations, felt hopeless. Then something changed. Perhaps it was the right combination of meds, I don’t know. For the first time in my life, color appeared. Where the world had been only hues of gray, I started to notice small details, like red birds in the trees, the taste of food, and the love of my dog (actually a big thing). I got a new psychiatrist (old-school) who listened to me, knew her meds, and gradually helped me reduce the number of psych meds I was I was on. I saw a difference at work-I actually talked to my colleagues now, rather than going immediately into the stacks as had been my wont. I started being more social (on the internet) and going to the local farmers market, out to dinner, and attending fests and plays . In short, I gained a life.

    This is the reason why, even should my gastroenterologist tell conclusively that I need to discontinue the Cymbalta, that I would tell him no. I would rather deal with symptoms of a physical illness any day than return to the devastating effects of depression. I’m doing, to use the words of Peter D. Kramer, “ordinarily well” and am stable, functioning at a high degree (except for the colitis), and want to keep it that way. So no tinkering with my psych meds!

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • Why I Won’t Change My Anti-Depressants

    Why I Won’t Change My Anti-Depressants

    I recently learned that I have microscopic colitis, specifically collagenous colitis. Upon doing some research into the subject, it seems that SSRIs and SNRIs might aggravate and possible even be a causative factor of this inflammatory bowel disease. Over the years I have taken SSRIs and SNRIs to help combat depression, with the SNRIs proving most effective, along with the atypical Remeron. Right now I’m on a relatively low dose of Cymbalta. I think it helps with my mood but wouldn’t be enough by itself to stop me from descending into the stygian depths. But it does double-duty, helping with the muscle and joint pains of fibromyalgia. And it does these things very effectively, with little side effects. To keep me stable and from severe depression, I rely upon Remeron, an atypical anti-depressant. This helps me sleep and provides the heavy duty lift that Cymbalta can’t. I ‘ve been on it for several years and keep my fingers crossed that it will continue to work, b/c it is THE “go-to” medication for severe and recalcitrant depression, which mine was. This regimen is my maintenance and my lifeline. I remember what life used to be before I found meds that worked, and it was literally a life not worth living. Every day I wanted to die. I would have killed myself, but that required more effort that I could muster, one, and two, I felt sure that I was so stupid I would bungle the job and be left in a state even worse than the one I was currently in. This was despite the efforts of excellent psychiatrists (back when psychiatrists still did therapy) and eventually even ECT. The ECT made me forget for a while, but the depression returned again and again. I was put on a stronger drug regimen, had hospitalizations, felt hopeless. Then something changed. Perhaps it was the right combination of meds, I don’t know. For the first time in my life, color appeared. Where the world had been only hues of gray, I started to notice small details, like red birds in the trees, the taste of food, and the love of my dog (actually a big thing). I got a new psychiatrist (old-school) who listened to me, knew her meds, and gradually helped me reduce the number of psych meds I was I was on. I saw a difference at work-I actually talked to my colleagues now, rather than going immediately into the stacks as had been my wont. I started being more social (on the internet) and going to the local farmers market, out to dinner, and attending fests and plays . In short, I gained a life.

    This is the reason why, even should my gastroenterologist tell conclusively that I need to discontinue the Cymbalta, that I would tell him no. I would rather deal with symptoms of a physical illness any day than return to the devastating effects of depression. I’m doing, to use the words of Peter D. Kramer, “ordinarily well” and am stable, functioning at a high degree (except for the colitis), and want to keep it that way. So no tinkering with my psych meds!

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • Ordinarily Well: The Case For Anti-Depressants By Peter D. Kramer-A Review

    Ordinarily Well: The Case For Anti-Depressants By Peter D. Kramer-A Review

    Let me say first of all that I came to this book predisposed to like it. I had read Kramer’s earlier books on depression (Listening to Prozac, Against Depression) and enjoyed them  a great deal. I’m aware that there has been a controversy concerning the use of anti-depressants and their efficacy so was pleased when I found this book. In the interest of transparency, I have a personal reason for advocacy of this book, for I have a long history with depression. I’ve got reason to know that anti-depressants can be just as efficacious and life-saving as Kramer says. They have indeed made me “ordinarily well”, a person who can function in the world. Before I found the one that worked, I was immobilized by anxiety and the kind of depression that cripples a person. I regarded existence as a burden, longed to die, but was so immobilized and enervated that I lacked the energy to do anything about it. The right anti-depressant and a good psychiatrist changed that. And after several good years on the right medication, I can say that I have found I am more resilient, that I can face even potentially devastating news with a measure of equanimity,  and that I can finally say “I enjoy living.” In Kramer’s new book, he makes the case that anti-depressants ARE effective, that they have the research behind them to back this up, and they function as what he calls “co-therapists.”  He cites study after study and backs up his claims with evidence. There IS reason to be wary of Big Pharma where psych drugs are concerned, but anti-depressants just might be one of their biggest successes. Don’t stop taking your anti-depressants! If you want to know WHY NOT, read this book!

  • Ordinarily Well: The Case For Anti-Depressants By Peter D. Kramer-A Review

    Ordinarily Well: The Case For Anti-Depressants By Peter D. Kramer-A Review

    Let me say first of all that I came to this book predisposed to like it. I had read Kramer’s earlier books on depression (Listening to Prozac, Against Depression) and enjoyed them  a great deal. I’m aware that there has been a controversy concerning the use of anti-depressants and their efficacy so was pleased when I found this book. In the interest of transparency, I have a personal reason for advocacy of this book, for I have a long history with depression. I’ve got reason to know that anti-depressants can be just as efficacious and life-saving as Kramer says. They have indeed made me “ordinarily well”, a person who can function in the world. Before I found the one that worked, I was immobilized by anxiety and the kind of depression that cripples a person. I regarded existence as a burden, longed to die, but was so immobilized and enervated that I lacked the energy to do anything about it. The right anti-depressant and a good psychiatrist changed that. And after several good years on the right medication, I can say that I have found I am more resilient, that I can face even potentially devastating news with a measure of equanimity,  and that I can finally say “I enjoy living.” In Kramer’s new book, he makes the case that anti-depressants ARE effective, that they have the research behind them to back this up, and they function as what he calls “co-therapists.”  He cites study after study and backs up his claims with evidence. There IS reason to be wary of Big Pharma where psych drugs are concerned, but anti-depressants just might be one of their biggest successes. Don’t stop taking your anti-depressants! If you want to know WHY NOT, read this book!

  • I Will Send Rain By Rae Meadows-A Review

    I Will Send Rain By Rae Meadows-A Review

    If you don’t know what “dust pneumonia” is, you need to read this novel by Rae Meadows. She writes with such grace that she breathes color into a  1930s landscape that very likely had  little in reality. Set in Mulehead, Oklahoma, the novel tells the story of Annie Bell in unsparing and relatively unsentimental detail but with such deftness that you can taste the grit of the dust that storms through the town and plagues the citizens as they depart one by one. She writes with a tenderness that lays her characters bare, so that the book is free of the cloying element that often accompanies historical fiction. I devoted an entire rainy evening to this book and enjoyed it very much, to my surprise. Not my usual read, but there you go. Books, like life, have a disconcerting way of surprising you, and that is one of the many reasons I love them!

  • I Will Send Rain By Rae Meadows-A Review

    I Will Send Rain By Rae Meadows-A Review

    If you don’t know what “dust pneumonia” is, you need to read this novel by Rae Meadows. She writes with such grace that she breathes color into a  1930s landscape that very likely had  little in reality. Set in Mulehead, Oklahoma, the novel tells the story of Annie Bell in unsparing and relatively unsentimental detail but with such deftness that you can taste the grit of the dust that storms through the town and plagues the citizens as they depart one by one. She writes with a tenderness that lays her characters bare, so that the book is free of the cloying element that often accompanies historical fiction. I devoted an entire rainy evening to this book and enjoyed it very much, to my surprise. Not my usual read, but there you go. Books, like life, have a disconcerting way of surprising you, and that is one of the many reasons I love them!