This is beyond good!

And how the video effects were produced:

(Note: This is a humorous look at the way our brains become obsessed with whatever it is that is currently the target. Please do not take this as an instruction manual, a criticism, a direction to follow, or anything else other than a wry observation of myself and my inherent quirks.)

Sooooo, yesterday I posted two things on Facebook: a photo of a heart-shaped mushroom I found in my yard, and a photo of me holding a print copy of my book, Tilted Windmills. Both of those photos showed up online about 18 hours ago, within about half an hour of each other.

Within minutes, somebody–five somebodys–liked the mushroom (it was the first photo to go up). Within half an hour or so, I had seven likes. Then my book photo went up. (It is beside the point that I think this is one of the few good pictures of me. Elliott took it–after insisting I wear a collared shirt–I chose his, and we won’t talk about his manly physique as he took the photo–and he did a great job.) Moments went by, and five more likes popped up. My heart swelled. It overflowed. Somebody–five somebodies–like me!

So every half hour or so–despite a good movie, despite cooking and cleaning, despite a life apart from Facebook–I checked my Facebook page. And with every like, my ego blossomed and expanded way beyond its normal boundaries. At latest count, after about 21 hours, I had a total of 35 comments and a whopping 62 likes. (We are ignoring the fact that I made comments myself, and that the same people might have liked both. Why let reality intrude?)

And sad to say, I still want more. More, more! What can I do to get more of these ego-boosting affirmations? No wonder people live on Facebook (or social media of choice). It’s all about me, we all think.

There must be something I can do to stay on top of the heap, keep my beaming smile right there in front of everybody. Despite all this unwarranted popularity, I still want more likes, and there’s a voice in the back of my head that tells me if I edit my photo, it’ll pop back to the top of everyone’s list. Maybe more people will see it. Maybe I’ll get more likes. Thankfully, common sense intrudes before I do anything silly, but I realize that getting these likes is an addiction. It’s pleasing to us, and what’s not to like about that? We always think we deserve more pleasure in our lives, and everybody I know works very hard at whatever it is they do, and they truly deserve a happier life (not that most aren’t happy, but you get the idea).

In the end, all those “me’s” probably cancel each other out. It’s not about *any* of us, it’s about *all* of us. A group, a whole, a community. Getting likes is a way of saying, “I’m part of this community, a valued member.” We all are.

Now maybe I can post a link to this blog–that’ll do it. And a photo of me, maybe showing a little cleavage this time… Oh it’s a slippery slope. Addiction like this is insidious. We rationalize that what we want will be good for everybody. I mean, who wouldn’t want to see more cleavage? (Don’t answer that.)

Or perhaps this is my fifteen minutes of fame and *blink* it’s over.

I wonder what I can photograph tomorrow?

A Review of ‘Shug’s Place-A Novel in Stories’

‘Shug’s Place’ and Bob Strother’s writing can handily fill the shoes of Robert B. Parker, if you’ve been missing Spenser in recent years, for Strother’s characters share with Parker’s that same gritty kind of urban beat (Detroit in ‘Shug’s Place’, opposite Parker’s Boston and environs). Shug and Spenser, as characters have much in common: They are both “men in full”, strength combined with complexity, goodness with a shot of ethical pragmatism, which is a mix that works very well for these stories, which range over fast action, police procedures, ethnic divisions, and human relationships.

In addition to Shug and the other engaging characters in Strother’s human cast, the title character should not be overlooked: This collection is named ‘Shug’s PLACE’; the present-day name of the bar Shug runs. Strother has lovingly imagined a deep history of stories connecting the ongoing tales born within those walls to persons, some long past and forgotten, whose lives were shaped by the same place; the building or ownership or patronage of the same little bar. Taverns, as a center for human congress, are fast slipping away from their original role in our history. American democracy, it’s been argued, was born in taverns. Strother has, like a film’s set designer, taken great care in etching careful details into this central setting, and using the flashback, has given the place its own deep back-story.

This all works very well, and the pages would “turn themselves” as I was reading. The book came my way at the recommendation of a friend, and I’m pleased to have received an advanced edition because of it. I always feel an obligation to provide a review when I get an ARC, but it’s not often such a pleasure to write them. ‘Shug’s Place-A Novel in Stories’ is a solidly entertaining collection for the “action/detective/tough-guy-with-a-heart-and-a-brain” audience. It will be available from Mint Hill Books, Main Street Rag Publishing Company, Charlotte, NC.

Someone told me last night that hammers kill more people than automatic weapons. Being a bleeding heart liberal on the far left side of the scale, I found that hard to believe, so I decided to check it out.

And I found a site written by Brett Breitbart  that claims just that, and cites the FBI as its source.

It links to a (from what I can tell) legitimate FBI site.

I won’t argue that the line that says “rifles” (348 murders) does include fewer murders in 2009 than the line that says “hammers [and other blunt objects]” (611 murders). But, as usual, there’s more to the story–like, the line that says “Firearms, type not stated”–which is a whopping 1,834. And when it says “rifle,” does this mean hunting rifle? Assault weapon type rifle? Where does an AR-15 fall in this categorization of deadly weapons (to name the one that’s gotten a lot of bad press lately)? Or a modified AR-15, which is apparently pretty easy to do?

I haven’t gone through the entire FBI site to figure out their classification–life is way too short for that–but I think it begs the question.

Assault weapons in general (and by this I mean the ones that are designed or modified to shoot many rounds) are there for a sole purpose: to kill other human beings. Plural human beings. (If you need more than three bullets to kill a human or a deer, sign up for marksmanship training at your local firearms center or go get your vision checked.) Seriously, can you think of any other reason to have one? My friend, who is an ardent gun rights advocate, also said his/her children have them because they’re “cool.” Huh? Cool? Sorry, buddy–tie dye is cool. Jerry Garcia is cool. Assault weapons are so not cool.

Hammers are designed to create something, to build something. I suspect (though I freely admit I haven’t verified this) that most murders with a hammer are crimes of opportunity and/or passion. Maybe those who use assault rifles are too, though I think that’s a weaker argument. If I see someone waltzing down the street with a hammer in his or her hand and a mean look on his or her face, my internal alarm bells hover around 3 on a scale of 1 to 10. Someone waltzing down the street with an assault weapon, even if he’s smiling? Duck and cover, folks, the scale’s gone off the top.

And the argument that people have guns to protect them from a government gone awry? Let’s assume for a moment that it’s even possible these days…that the government has decided that our little section of Georgia needs some serious disciplining. Heck, make it the whole state of Georgia. Washington feels we’re just way out of control and it’s time to send in the military, to make an example out of us so the other 49 states fall into line. You really think the entire state could defend itself against the might of the U.S. military? Just cut off our Internet and see how long we’d last. Close the Atlanta airport, stop the gas pipelines. We’d be fighting each other tooth and nail before too long, and the government could just wait and let us knock each other off. I don’t argue that otherwise intelligent people believe the malarky about government conspiracies to kill off those who don’t agree with them, but I question the sources of their information. And while this opens up a whole new can of worms, I think this conspiracy nonsense was planted and is fed and watered by NRA-type groups who make a profit off of selling weapons. If I want to sell a product, I first have to create a need for that product. The NRA has done just that, and too many sheep have bought into it. (I mean no disrespect. We’re all sheep in some fashion. There are very few true individuals.)

Because we can’t win a war, is that a reason not to fight it, if we believe it is right to do so? Of course not. But fighting someone else’s war that’s been fomented for financial and political motives? You’re just trading one master for another.

People keep assault weapons for one reason: Fear. Fear of government, fear of burglars, fear of other humans. (And don’t try that argument that you have it for protection or for love…those are covers. Yes, you care about and want to protect your loved ones, but it’s based on fear of what might get them.) Face those fears–find the facts (not the opinions)–and see if they hold up.

Do you need fourteen different weapons to protect yourself against an armed burglar (never mind the fact that the weapons should be locked up when not in actual use)? Unless you live in a war zone, one should be plenty.

There’s always a possibility that I’m the one who doesn’t get it. Feel free to enlighten me. But in the meantime, if there really is a government conspiracy, could someone please tell me about it? I’m always the last to know things.