Oh, Mom

[Editor’s note: inspired by a neighbor’s actual event, as reported on Facebook. Happy Mother’s Day to all the mothers reading this.]

Oh, Mom,
I did it again, like when I was ten
And then, in the middle of the night
In panic and fright I committed the sin
Of turning your bedding off-white.

Oh, Mom,
I was queasy then and I am again,
And once more I stand at your door.
Too much to drink, this time I think.
I should’ve stopped instead of saying, “More.”

Oh, Mom,
As I now look in, the light is very thin.
I hear the roar of a brain-jarring snore.
Is that you or Dad? Oh, my achy breaky head.
I pitch in too soon, onto the bed — ka-boom!

Oh, Mom,
I will try again. Oh, where to begin?
I did not mean to do or repeat anew,
But my head went in, like when I was ten,
And turned white into red, white, and “Ouuh!”

Oh, Mom,
I did it again, like I did back then,
When, in the middle of the night,
In panic and fright I committed the sin
Of turning your bedding off-white.

–by David E. Booker

Leave a comment

Filed under 2016, poetry, poetry by author

Meanwhile, in a dank corner of the dictionary

We Know You Hate ‘Moist.’ What Other Words Repel You?

By JONAH BROMWICH

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/07/science/moist-word-aversion.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=5&pgtype=sectionfront

Super Moist cake mix

Moist. Luggage. Crevice. Stroke. Slacks. Phlegm.

How did those words make you feel?

Certain everyday words drive some people crazy, a phenomenon experts call “word aversion.” But one word appears to rise above all others: “moist.” For that reason, a recent paper in the journal PLOS One used the word as a stand-in to explore why people find some terms repellent.

“It doesn’t really fit into a lot of existing categories for how people think about the psychology of language,” the study’s author, Paul Thibodeau, a professor of psychology at Oberlin College, said of moist. “It’s not a taboo word, it’s not profanity, but it elicits this very visceral disgust reaction.”

A little less than a quarter of the approximately 2,500 unique subjects tested in Mr. Thibodeau’s five experiments over four years had trouble dealing with any appearance of the word.

When asked to react to moist in a free-association task, about one-third of those people responded with “an expression of disgust,” Mr. Thibodeau said. Almost two-thirds of those who later reported an aversion were so bothered by “moist” that they could recall its inclusion among a set of 63 other words — an unusually high rate.

The peer-reviewed study attempted to explain why moist had become the linguistic equivalent of nails on a chalkboard for some people.

Words that sound similar — including hoist, foist and rejoiced — did not put off participants in the same way, suggesting that aversion to the word was not based on the way it sounds. But people who were bothered by moist also found that words for bodily fluids — vomit, puke and phlegm — largely struck a nerve. That led Mr. Thibodeau to conclude that for those people moist had taken on the connotations of a bodily function.

It has long been acknowledged that many people are cursed with moist phobia. In 2007, a linguistics professor from the University of Pennsylvania, Mark Liberman, wrote about moist in exploring the concept of word aversion. In 2012, the word came up again, after The New Yorker asked readers which ones they would eliminate from the English language. Mr. Thibodeau’s study cites People magazine’s 2013 attempt to have some of its “sexiest men” make “the worst word sound hot!”

But Jason Riggle, a linguistics professor at the University of Chicago, said the excessive focus on moist might have made a broader understanding of word aversion more difficult.

“Moist has become such a flagship word for this, and the fact that so many people talk about it now makes it harder to get a handle on” word aversion more generally, he said.

That may help explain why other recent studies on word aversion, unlike Mr. Thibodeau’s, found a close link between a word’s phonological properties — its combination of sounds — and people’s reactions.

David Eagleman, a neuroscientist at the Baylor College of Medicine whose lab has conducted its own experiments into word aversion over the past year, found that an unusual combination of sounds in a group of made-up words was more likely to put people off than several other factors. A study at Colby College last year also suggested that a word’s phonological properties could repel people.

Dr. Eagleman suspects that word aversion is similar to synesthesia, the blending of senses in which an aural phenomenon, such as a musical note, can trigger a visual or even an emotional response. He suggested that the process through which a specific combination of sounds evokes disgust might be similar.

“There appears to be this relationship between phonological probability and aversion,” he said. “In other words, something that is improbable, something that doesn’t sound like it should belong in your language, has this emotional reaction that goes along with it.”

Dr. Eagleman said that his lab’s experiments were a prelude to neuroimaging that could investigate how the brain responds when faced with aversive words. But in the meantime, it might help to compile a broader list of words that certain people cannot stand.

So here’s a question for you: Forgetting all things moist for a second, what other words (without explicit sexual, scatological, racial or taboo connotations) do you find repulsive? And we don’t mean the merely annoying (like “literally”) or obnoxious (like “synergy”), but words that are viscerally repellent.

Name them, and tell us why they disgust you in the comments section. Feel free to recommend words already listed by others.

[Editor’s note: I find nothing wrong with the word moist. A serviceable word. On cake batter boxes, mixes are promoted as moist and even “Super Moist.” I think people are confusing moist with dank and need a dictionary or dictionary application.]

Leave a comment

Filed under 2016, words

Photo finish Friday: “Park it”

Sometimes, before you can play in the park, you have to work in it a little.

Sometimes, before you can play in the park, you have to work in it a little.

Leave a comment

Filed under 2016, photo by David E. Booker, Photo Finish Friday

Haiku to you Thursday: “Chasing Jupiter”

Full moon and planet, /

divers to the horizon. /

Chasing Jupiter.

Leave a comment

Filed under 2016, Haiku to You Thursday, poetry by author

Writing tip Wednesday: “Don’t say this at home”

"Said" or "asked" is usually enough. As in Mike said or Beth asked.

“Said” or “asked” is usually enough. As in Mike said or Beth asked.

Leave a comment

Filed under writing tip, Writing Tip Wednesday

cARtOONSdAY: “eDITING tIP”

Dinner with editor

Leave a comment

May 3, 2016 · 7:03 am

Monday morning writing joke: “Dog on it”

An editor couldn’t believe a book he was helping to publish was written by a dog, so he requested a meeting. The dog and the owner walked into the office and each sat down in a chair.

“I’d like to ask you a few questions,” the editor said.

The dog yawned, which the editor took to mean go ahead.

“Since you are the first dog author I have dealt with, can you tell me what it was like to write this book?”

“Rough,” said the dog.

The editor decided he should be a little more specific. “What did you think of the line edits we sent to you for changes in the manuscript?”

The dog glanced over at his owner and then cocked back his head and howled.

The editor looked at his watch. He didn’t have much more time until his next meeting. He was finding it hard to believe this wasn’t some stunt cooked up by the dog’s owner. He sighed, glanced down at the contract, and asked a question he knew the dog wouldn’t be able to answer with a bark or howl. “As a first-time author, what do you think of our book advance structure and royalty payments?”

The dog immediately hopped from the chair to the editor’s desk, hiked his leg, and peed all over the contract.

Leave a comment

Filed under 2016, joke by author, Monday morning writing joke

Five questions with Stephen King

Stephen King answers 5 questions from the BDN

Source: http://bangordailynews.com/2016/04/28/living/stephen-king-answers-5-questions-from-the-bdn/

Stephen King

Stephen King

We’re always curious about what best-selling author and Bangor resident Stephen King is doing. To find out, the BDN (Bangor Daily News) emailed him five questions Thursday morning. Sixteen minutes later, we had his answers.

1. What are you working on today?

“Just thinking about a new story. That’s always the first step.”

2. What keeps you awake at night?

“Nothing, currently.”

3. Are you a glass half empty or half full person?

“Three quarters full. I like to relish the good stuff and take care of the bad stuff as best I can. Or let it go, if I can’t. Most of my worries look silly a month later.”

4.What is it about Bangor that keeps you here, at least some of the time?

“I love the neighborhood, and seeing people I know at the Corner Store, the Fairmount, the baseball field, and downtown. Not to mention strawberry pancakes at Nicky’s Cruisin’ Diner.”

5. If you could have a 5-minute conversation with anyone living or dead, who would it be?

“I’d talk to Lee Harvey Oswald (but I’d keep him at a distance, and make sure he was unarmed). It wouldn’t take five minutes, just a four-word question: ‘Did you do it?’”

Leave a comment

Filed under 2016, author

Will fan fiction be the next target?

‘Star Trek’ Copyright Battle Pits Paramount and CBS Against ‘Professional’ Fan Film

Enterprising producer raised over $1.2 million, and promised a ‘feature-quality’ movie

by Mark Perton

Source: http://www.newsweek.com/star-trek-fan-fiction-451320

Star Trek, the venerable sci-fi franchise that turns 50 this year, has long been known for the dedication of its fans. In the late 1960s, when the original TV series was threatened with cancellation after two seasons, a letter-writing campaign brought the show back for a third year. After the show was canceled the following year, fan conventions kept the Trek dream alive, screening rare clips and “blooper reels” which, in that pre-VCR, pre-YouTube era, allowed them to explore the frontiers of their favorite show.

Fans at those conventions also shared fan fiction: mostly mimeographed stories that created new adventures for the characters that left TV two years shy of completing their “five year mission.” Over time, fan fiction evolved and became a multimedia genre, and even as Star Trek was revived and developed as a major media property encompassing a dozen motion pictures and hundreds of TV episodes, fan-produced films became a mainstay of YouTube and other video sites.

Kirk (left) and Spock (right) of Star Trek.

Kirk (left) and Spock (right) of Star Trek.

Today’s fan films, like written fan fiction, occupy a legal gray zone. While some can potentially be considered satire or commentary, and therefore, legally permitted works, many can easily be classified as unauthorized exploitation of copyrighted material—and could be shut down by the copyright’s owners.

For the most part, Paramount Pictures and CBS, which jointly own the copyrights associated with Star Trek, have turned a blind eye to non-commercial fan productions, and have even seemed to encourage them. James Cawley, a fan producer who built detailed reproductions of original Star Trek sets in his upstate New York studio, had a cameo in J.J. Abrams’ 2009 Star Trek film. Paramount also borrowed props from Cawley’s studio for use in the series Star Trek: Enterprise, and named a ship in one episode the Ticonderoga, a reference to the fan producer’s hometown.

Fan efforts have also been embraced by many in the “official” Star Trek creative community; fan films have featured dozens of cast members from Paramount’s productions, including original series stars Walter Koenig, Nichelle Nichols and George Takei, and actors from many other Trek outings, ranging from Star Trek: Voyager’s Tim Russ to Alan Ruck, who played hapless starship captain John Harriman in Star Trek: Generations (but is, of course, best known for playing hapless teenager Cameron Frye in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off). One fan series includes Chris Doohan, the son of the actor who played Scotty in the original series, taking over his father’s role. Even Majel Barrett Roddenberry, wife of Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry, reprised her role as the voice of the U.S.S. Enterprise’s computer in a fan production. Writers like original series legends D.C. Fontana and David Gerrold (best known for the classic episode “The Trouble With Tribbles”) have contributed scripts to fan films.

For years, fan producers formed a close community, trading tips and cast members, sharing props and studios, and engaging in friendly competition over things like the accuracy of their sets, their interpretations of classic characters and the quality of their productions. And their productions became increasingly more polished as digital technology allowed them to create CGI space battles and elaborate green screen sets, and do sophisticated editing and post-production work on affordable computers. To produce these ever-more sophisticated films, fans turned to crowdfunding, in some cases raising hundreds of thousands of dollars through platforms like Kickstarter and Indiegogo.

As the fan films began working with budgets that rivaled those of some independent movies, and successfully recruited cast and crew members who had worked on commercial Trek properties, one nagging question kept coming up: When will someone go too far and draw the ire of Paramount and CBS? As Hollywood news site The Wrap put it last August, after the fan film Star Trek: Axanar—which its producer said would be as good as something “coming out of the studio”—raised over $1 million through its crowdfunding campaigns, “the seven-figure bankroll raises questions about just how ‘fan’ the project is and at what point it poses a threat to the authorized franchise.”

Axanar’s budget and boasts may have been too much for Paramount and CBS, and in December, the two companies sued Axanar Productions, claiming that its work “infringe[s] Plaintiffs’ works by using innumerable copyrighted elements of Star Trek, including its settings, characters, species, and themes.” The suit named the production company, studio head Alec Peters, and “Does 1-20,” an unnamed group that could expand to include personnel such as director Robert Meyer Burnett, an industry professional who had previously produced featurettes for CBS’ Star Trek Blu-ray releases.

In its lawsuit, Paramount and CBS cited the fact that the Axanar team referred to their project as a “fully professional, independent Star Trek film” that raised over $1 million, adding that the producers “enjoy a direct financial benefit from the preparation, duplication and distribution of the infringing Axanar Works.”

Indeed, Axanar Productions boasted of plans to use its studio to produce other films and actively defended its broader ambitions. Unlike other fan producers, who largely volunteer their time, Axanar’s Peters paid himself a salary of $38,000 in 2015. Axanar also built a merchandising business, offering everything from scale models of ships featured in its films to Axanar-branded coffee on a “donor” website.

Rather than fold up his tent, Peters fought back, and brought on pro bono lawyers to defend his right to produce the film, saying that it’s a non-commercial production, is covered under fair use doctrines, and that the suit is too vague and broad, claiming ownership of things like the fictitious Klingon language. In the meantime, production on Axanar was halted, leaving a 20-minute teaser, Prelude to Axanar (which is also a subject of the lawsuit), as the nascent studio’s only product.

Paramount and CBS may be particularly sensitive at the moment to unauthorized works designed, as the Axanar team put it, to “look and feel like a true Star Trek movie.” The studios are gearing up for the July release of the latest film in the series, Star Trek: Beyond, along with a major merchandising blitz in conjunction with the film and the franchise’s 50th anniversary. Based on the combination of ticket sales and licensing, Star Trek properties could bring in close to $1 billion this year. And in 2017, CBS will launch the sixth live-action Star Trek TV series, with a risky online-only model designed to anchor the network’s CBS All Access streaming service; if successful, the new series could add over $400 million to CBS’s bottom line next year.

As the suit has progressed, it has has split the once tight-knit fan film community. Some fans believe that Peters is going too far.

“There is no question in my mind that CBS owns Star Trek,” fan film producer James Cawley recently commented in a popular Star Trek forum. “They have been very gracious to allow us to play in their sandbox for many years,” he wrote, adding that “if CBS says, stop making fan films, we would abide by their wishes and say thank you.” In a seeming comparison between Axanar’s ambitions and more traditional fan fiction, he commented: “I don’t rent my sets, I don’t charge for anything, and I certainly have never gotten any salary for playing Trek with my friends” and, “I did it for nothing but the love of the game, if and when it ends at least I can say I played by the rules I was given when I cross the finish line.”

Meanwhile, Peters has taken on his erstwhile compatriots, pointing out to the Trek news site 1701News that he’s built a professional team: “They’re not fans who are voice actors, or Elvis impersonators who have a hobby and have always wanted to play Capt. Kirk.” (Cawley, who played Kirk in several of his own productions, is also an Elvis impersonator, while another fan producer and Kirk actor, Vic Mignogna, is a voice actor.)

The suit has also highlighted rifts among those affiliated with the official Star Trek productions. Star Trek: Beyond director Justin Lin took to Twitter to defend Axanar, writing: “This is getting ridiculous! I support the fans. Star Trek belongs to all of us.” However, Rod Roddenberry, son of Trek creator Gene Roddenberry, and an executive producer on CBS’ forthcoming Star Trek series, commented to an interviewer that, while he’s “a fan of fans keeping Star Trek alive,” fan producers have to “follow the rules and do it right,” or “there’s going to be prices and penalties to pay.”

Fallout from the case has already hurt other fan productions. Mignogna’s latest installment of his Star Trek Continues series is far behind in its crowdfunding goals, and the producer told fan site The Bronze Review, “there are a lot of scared folks out there, afraid to donate to a fan production due to the climate now.” In late April, another fan project, Star Trek: Federation Rising, was canceled, after its producer said he was contacted by CBS executives, who “advised me that their legal team strongly suggested that we do not move forward.” In a Facebook posting, producer Tommy Kraft thanked CBS “for reaching out to me, rather than including us in their ongoing lawsuit against Axanar.

Kraft also announced plans to produce an original science fiction film, completely devoid of any Star Trek intellectual property. If there’s a silver lining to the current situation, it may well be based on plans like Kraft’s. One only need look at the history of fan-fiction author Erika Mitchell. After writing a set of stories featuring characters from the popular Twilight books, Mitchell, under the pen-name E.L. James, reworked her tales and removed all references to Twilight. The resulting work, the Fifty Shades of Grey series, has since sold more than 125 million copies worldwide, has been adapted as a major motion picture and has earned Mitchell over $100 million.

Perhaps freedom from Paramount and CBS’s properties, could, in the end, allow former Trek projects to boldly go where no fan film has gone before.

Source: http://www.newsweek.com/star-trek-fan-fiction-451320

Leave a comment

Filed under 2016, Star Trek

Photo finish Friday: “Faded Glory”

An old house; a new flag. The problems and the promises run deep.

An old house; a new flag. The problems and the promises run deep.

Leave a comment

Filed under 2016, photo by David E. Booker, Photo Finish Friday