I've recently converted to being happy. You're welcome to ride along. It should be a glorious train wreck.
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Anywhere There's Oxygen
A silly video for Phantom Buffalo's "Anywhere There's Oxygen"
Today we think our car got towed for unpaid parking tickets and our savings are temporarily depleted because we made an investment in a really great piece of recording equipment and haven't yet sold the other equipment that will pay for it and I'm scheduled for some overtime this week but thanks to some one-time unexpected bills, very little of the surplus will end up in savings, most likely.
So I've been thinking of this song by Phantom Buffalo. It's always been a favorite of mine, and I think there are very few people who can't relate or couldn't at some point relate to the desire to be free of the daily grind, the pressure of the grown up obligation to figure out how to "buy my food and stay alive."
I wrote on this subject fairly recently and mentioned that I was making a move in the direction of leaving my job and moving to something more personally fulfilling, but even those baby steps have been halted having collided head first with the hefty time commitments of working in a seasonal business. Only a year ago I would likely have folded up in despair and resigned myself to the high probability of being stuck indefinitely, but now that the ol' serotonin's flowing properly I see things in a different light.
In the midst of a particularly stressful and soul-crushing weeks at work recently, I cracked. Sobbing in the bathroom at work cracked. And after several days of this, I had an epiphany while talking to the lumber delivery driver who's become my friend. "I'm going to go give my notice for the fall after this boat leaves," I told him. "Aw shit, girl, good for you. I wanna do the same thing. Good luck." And in a state of total insanity, I did. I walked into my boss' office just as he was reading a particularly defeated incident report I wrote that concluded, "Obviously I am a bad person," and I told him I was done after Labor Day. After talking with him about it for a while, I agreed to think about it and I've since rescinded my resignation. For now. That I'm on my way out is a "when," not an "if" proposition.
Yes, I was acting rashly in an emotionally charged moment, but it wasn't completely irrational. Being extremely risk averse I've built up an unreasonably high tolerance for bullshit when the alternative is walking into the unknown. The safety of a job that pays well and offers health benefits is something I don't take for granted and I've been willing to work around the parts that don't work for me in order to hold onto it. But I never intended to stay there forever and I know what I'd rather be doing. So no, I'm not going to storm out the door in a fit of pique with nothing lined up, but I am going to have to make a bold move and possibly a leap of faith.
In our household we're at a crossroads where we're confident in our strengths and eager to put them into service. We can easily picture a future in which we support ourselves by doing things that are deeply satisfying. In the short term, though, that requires taking scary and decisive action and doing some serious preparation to put some sort of safety net in place before we throw ourselves into the uncertain future. On a spaceship built for two going anywhere there's oxygen.
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Probably the Most Depressing Post I'll Ever Write
Sometimes my thinking goes to some really dark places, and a really weird thing happens: I recognize that I'm being grim and fatalistic, but it doesn't seem all that unreasonable. I think it's probably some kind of cognitive dissonance that allows me to think wild theoretical things without the emotional weight of real-life consequences, but knowing that intellectually doesn't have any practical effect.
Here's a case in point: P.Z. Myers, a biologist and blogger that I generally enjoy reading and often agree with posted this yesterday. In it, he discusses a medical science experiment in the U.K. wherein kittens' eyes are sewn shut in order to explore the relationship between the physical, structural growth of the brain and visual processing. The Mirror conducted a (typically useless, as public opinion polls tend to be) public opinion poll about whether this was an acceptable practice. For a number of reasons including the fact that kittens are wonderful and people love them and the decidedly inflammatory tone to the article, the poll was, at the time of Myers' post, roughly 92% against these experiments.
The point of the post, to some extent, was to encourage readers to "pharyngulate" the poll, a process wherein readers of Myers' blog, Pharyngula, rush the polls to reflect the community's pro-science, skeptical values. When last I read the comments, the poll had been successfully pharyngulated to the extent that the numbers were closing on an even split.
Meanwhile, in the comments section of the post itself, the chatter among Myers' readers departed from the typical script wherein fans agree and dissent comes from outrageous trolls and wingnuts. In this case the debate was, as blog-comment debate goes, fairly collegial and, with notable exceptions, civil. While a large majority supported the "necessary evil" of animal testing, there was a contingent of loyal opposition that just couldn't get behind it.
The general consensus posited by supporters was that opponents found this exercise horrific because the animals in question were kittens, a species for which humans feel a particular emotional and often familial attachment. A portion of the naysayers agreed that they would feel differently about non-companion animals, and a tiny faction opposed animal testing full stop.
Some way into the hundreds of comments, Myers' chimed back in to say that he found it disturbing that people would suggest that there was some inherent difference in using kittens, over, say, ferrets as the process was so mildly intrusive and humanely practiced that it should not be objectionable regardless of species. The implication from the pro-test crowd was that opposition was illogical and emotionally-driven at best and anti-science nut jobs at worst.
You can probably guess that I, a person who just yesterday exclaimed over some delicious potato chips, "Wow! They taste like sour cream and onion, but no cows were raped to make them taste good!" oppose animal experimentation. And I KNOW huge advances in medical science have come from it. And I KNOW that even products labeled "no animal testing" contain ingredients that were likely tested on animals some other time by some other company. And I KNOW everyone's just dying to say, "If your mother/boyfriend/self/insert-loved-one-here had cancer/multiple sclerosis/insert-lethal-disease-here and animal testing could produce a cure you'd change your tune," but you know what? This is where shit gets really dark.
Because while I've actually worked myself into full-on panic attacks thinking about the possibility of losing the people dear to me (Have you seen the movie "The Fountain"? I wept uncontrollably for nearly half an hour afterwards at the idea that I could easily lose my then husband to long disease or in the blink of an eye to a simple traffic accident or mad gunman) but I really just can't square the morality of torturing and killing animals (yes, they're "euthanized" afterwards... the silver-lining of which is it cuts down on the lingering psychological effects) in the name of possibly reducing suffering in others.
This debate is one of those intractable ones like abortion and religion wherein arguments on both sides are familiar and heavily worn and generally ineffective in swaying the opposition. The comment-section debate was chock full of but-they're-not-sentient-yes-they-are-okay-maybe-but-they-don't-have-agency arguments with a heavy dose of sewing-their-eyes-shut-isn't-painful-sometimes-it's-used-therapeutically-and-you-don't-call-it-torture-then-plus-lab-assistants-care-for-and-about-the-animals-post-op.
To which I say this:
I feel bad when I step on my kitten's tail because I know she feels pain. I put the cats in a different room when I vacuum because they experience fear. They experience and remember and avoid recurrence of trauma as evidenced by their immediate flight at the sight of said vacuum cleaner or the grim cat Alcatraz that is the travel kennel. To the extent that they have preferences for what does or doesn't happen to them, however reflexive and instinctual those preferences are, they have agency. Sometimes, like children, their preferences are overridden for their greater good (going to the vet, say) but, as with children, we respect their needs and desires as members of the community that is our home.
As to the relative lack of suffering involved in this procedure (compared to, I dunno...force-feeding poisons? putting chemicals in their eyes? vivisection?) I'll turn some smug chump's comment back on him: "I don't see anyone opposed to animal testing volunteering themselves." EXACTLY, you moron. You would not conduct this very "gentle," very "non-invasive" procedure on your child or yourself, so please spare me the argument that it's really no big deal. And there are a lot of cringe-inducing things we do to treat disease, things that are painful and difficult but which we deem a worthwhile trade off for the privilege of staying alive (radiation and chemotherapy come to mind) that we wouldn't dream of inflicting on a healthy person. Context matters in questions of morality.
I can't think of any distinction between human and animal life that makes the sacrifice and suffering of the latter on behalf of the former acceptable. We've agreed that we ought not experiment on any humans regardless of their physical or mental capacity or their relative contributions to society so what makes similar considerations fair game when we're talking non-human animals?
Down, down the rabbit hole (ha!) I go to a place where I just don't think humanity inherently deserves...well, a lot of the things we take for granted as a reward for being the smartest monkeys going, where I'm so unclear about what our end game is that I wonder why we play at all, where our similarities to parasitic organisms, propagating and expanding for the sake of it without regard for anything but basic survival are uncomfortable. Surely we've done amazing, wonderful things with all the gifts evolution has wrought, but to my mind our capacity to ponder and act on complex philosophical and ethical considerations is the characteristic that ostensibly sets us apart from the hoi polloi of critters scrambling to pass on genetic material.
It's normal to want to protect the things closest to you before you extend care outside your personal sphere. In times of scarcity, a parent will feed his or her child before offering food to the neighbors, and help the neighbors before donating to a charity (mostly, maybe, unless they let their dog poop on the lawn). But we generally recognize (some more clearly than others) an obligation to the larger society, that despite our desire to take care of those closest to us, it's not acceptable to inflict suffering on others in order to alleviate our own. Unfortunately, this recognition is incredibly myopic. As the spheres grow larger into national and international human communities we become increasingly willing to overlook that moral logic, and when it comes to the place of humans in a global, ecological context, that sense of community obligations tend to break down altogether.
I believe, on an individual level, in living while you're alive, making the most and best of every day because when you're dead, you're done. Ideally we would enact a similar M.O. as a species. Yes, we should strive to learn and explore everything we possibly can, make the most and best of our big brains, but conscientiously, with more respect for the world around us right now than for our theoretical future selves, because if we go the way of the dinosaurs, we're done. I don't wish ill on the imaginary future, but I think the greater responsibility ought to be to building for that future by creating the most just and sustainable culture possible in the relatively-controllable present
It feels weird and kind of awful to think so bleakly, and I'm sure there's more than a little news-induced gloom in play, but it's also crushingly depressing that people can so easily rationalize cruelty from a position of incredible arrogance. I'm not giving up on humanity, I'm just doom-fatigued and disappointed in a thousand different ways.
I'll be over here in my misanthropic cave eating twigs and dying of preventable illness if anyone needs me.
Here's a case in point: P.Z. Myers, a biologist and blogger that I generally enjoy reading and often agree with posted this yesterday. In it, he discusses a medical science experiment in the U.K. wherein kittens' eyes are sewn shut in order to explore the relationship between the physical, structural growth of the brain and visual processing. The Mirror conducted a (typically useless, as public opinion polls tend to be) public opinion poll about whether this was an acceptable practice. For a number of reasons including the fact that kittens are wonderful and people love them and the decidedly inflammatory tone to the article, the poll was, at the time of Myers' post, roughly 92% against these experiments.
The point of the post, to some extent, was to encourage readers to "pharyngulate" the poll, a process wherein readers of Myers' blog, Pharyngula, rush the polls to reflect the community's pro-science, skeptical values. When last I read the comments, the poll had been successfully pharyngulated to the extent that the numbers were closing on an even split.
Meanwhile, in the comments section of the post itself, the chatter among Myers' readers departed from the typical script wherein fans agree and dissent comes from outrageous trolls and wingnuts. In this case the debate was, as blog-comment debate goes, fairly collegial and, with notable exceptions, civil. While a large majority supported the "necessary evil" of animal testing, there was a contingent of loyal opposition that just couldn't get behind it.
The general consensus posited by supporters was that opponents found this exercise horrific because the animals in question were kittens, a species for which humans feel a particular emotional and often familial attachment. A portion of the naysayers agreed that they would feel differently about non-companion animals, and a tiny faction opposed animal testing full stop.
Some way into the hundreds of comments, Myers' chimed back in to say that he found it disturbing that people would suggest that there was some inherent difference in using kittens, over, say, ferrets as the process was so mildly intrusive and humanely practiced that it should not be objectionable regardless of species. The implication from the pro-test crowd was that opposition was illogical and emotionally-driven at best and anti-science nut jobs at worst.
You can probably guess that I, a person who just yesterday exclaimed over some delicious potato chips, "Wow! They taste like sour cream and onion, but no cows were raped to make them taste good!" oppose animal experimentation. And I KNOW huge advances in medical science have come from it. And I KNOW that even products labeled "no animal testing" contain ingredients that were likely tested on animals some other time by some other company. And I KNOW everyone's just dying to say, "If your mother/boyfriend/self/insert-loved-one-here had cancer/multiple sclerosis/insert-lethal-disease-here and animal testing could produce a cure you'd change your tune," but you know what? This is where shit gets really dark.
Because while I've actually worked myself into full-on panic attacks thinking about the possibility of losing the people dear to me (Have you seen the movie "The Fountain"? I wept uncontrollably for nearly half an hour afterwards at the idea that I could easily lose my then husband to long disease or in the blink of an eye to a simple traffic accident or mad gunman) but I really just can't square the morality of torturing and killing animals (yes, they're "euthanized" afterwards... the silver-lining of which is it cuts down on the lingering psychological effects) in the name of possibly reducing suffering in others.
This debate is one of those intractable ones like abortion and religion wherein arguments on both sides are familiar and heavily worn and generally ineffective in swaying the opposition. The comment-section debate was chock full of but-they're-not-sentient-yes-they-are-okay-maybe-but-they-don't-have-agency arguments with a heavy dose of sewing-their-eyes-shut-isn't-painful-sometimes-it's-used-therapeutically-and-you-don't-call-it-torture-then-plus-lab-assistants-care-for-and-about-the-animals-post-op.
To which I say this:
I feel bad when I step on my kitten's tail because I know she feels pain. I put the cats in a different room when I vacuum because they experience fear. They experience and remember and avoid recurrence of trauma as evidenced by their immediate flight at the sight of said vacuum cleaner or the grim cat Alcatraz that is the travel kennel. To the extent that they have preferences for what does or doesn't happen to them, however reflexive and instinctual those preferences are, they have agency. Sometimes, like children, their preferences are overridden for their greater good (going to the vet, say) but, as with children, we respect their needs and desires as members of the community that is our home.
As to the relative lack of suffering involved in this procedure (compared to, I dunno...force-feeding poisons? putting chemicals in their eyes? vivisection?) I'll turn some smug chump's comment back on him: "I don't see anyone opposed to animal testing volunteering themselves." EXACTLY, you moron. You would not conduct this very "gentle," very "non-invasive" procedure on your child or yourself, so please spare me the argument that it's really no big deal. And there are a lot of cringe-inducing things we do to treat disease, things that are painful and difficult but which we deem a worthwhile trade off for the privilege of staying alive (radiation and chemotherapy come to mind) that we wouldn't dream of inflicting on a healthy person. Context matters in questions of morality.
I can't think of any distinction between human and animal life that makes the sacrifice and suffering of the latter on behalf of the former acceptable. We've agreed that we ought not experiment on any humans regardless of their physical or mental capacity or their relative contributions to society so what makes similar considerations fair game when we're talking non-human animals?
Down, down the rabbit hole (ha!) I go to a place where I just don't think humanity inherently deserves...well, a lot of the things we take for granted as a reward for being the smartest monkeys going, where I'm so unclear about what our end game is that I wonder why we play at all, where our similarities to parasitic organisms, propagating and expanding for the sake of it without regard for anything but basic survival are uncomfortable. Surely we've done amazing, wonderful things with all the gifts evolution has wrought, but to my mind our capacity to ponder and act on complex philosophical and ethical considerations is the characteristic that ostensibly sets us apart from the hoi polloi of critters scrambling to pass on genetic material.
It's normal to want to protect the things closest to you before you extend care outside your personal sphere. In times of scarcity, a parent will feed his or her child before offering food to the neighbors, and help the neighbors before donating to a charity (mostly, maybe, unless they let their dog poop on the lawn). But we generally recognize (some more clearly than others) an obligation to the larger society, that despite our desire to take care of those closest to us, it's not acceptable to inflict suffering on others in order to alleviate our own. Unfortunately, this recognition is incredibly myopic. As the spheres grow larger into national and international human communities we become increasingly willing to overlook that moral logic, and when it comes to the place of humans in a global, ecological context, that sense of community obligations tend to break down altogether.
I believe, on an individual level, in living while you're alive, making the most and best of every day because when you're dead, you're done. Ideally we would enact a similar M.O. as a species. Yes, we should strive to learn and explore everything we possibly can, make the most and best of our big brains, but conscientiously, with more respect for the world around us right now than for our theoretical future selves, because if we go the way of the dinosaurs, we're done. I don't wish ill on the imaginary future, but I think the greater responsibility ought to be to building for that future by creating the most just and sustainable culture possible in the relatively-controllable present
It feels weird and kind of awful to think so bleakly, and I'm sure there's more than a little news-induced gloom in play, but it's also crushingly depressing that people can so easily rationalize cruelty from a position of incredible arrogance. I'm not giving up on humanity, I'm just doom-fatigued and disappointed in a thousand different ways.
I'll be over here in my misanthropic cave eating twigs and dying of preventable illness if anyone needs me.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
This Agression Will Not Stand
Let's set aside the obnoxious old saw that it takes more muscles to frown than smile and admit that, in situations that are frustrating or unpleasant, the path of least resistance is to be awful. It's a hard thing to admit and most of us have the blinders on when it comes to our own tendency to be ungracious, but it's true and human and something that requires vigilance instead of denial.
The past few weeks at work have been particularly hellacious, an impossible numbers game wherein hundreds of people descend on our five-person operation with everything they own and, owing to a poor understanding of geometry, physics, and the notion that the world doesn't revolve around them, become enraged to find that we can't fit the astonishing pile of consumer goods they've deemed necessary for a weekend getaway on a boat immediately.
Look, I'm no angel where this is concerned. No one ever thinks they're the one being unreasonable, and I'd like to imagine that I can claim the high road. Realistically, though, it takes an extraordinary amount of energy not to trade snark for snark, raised voice for raised voice, veiled insult for veiled insult. I try. Really hard. But while I'm mostly successful in not shooting first, I struggle not to fire back in kind and when I dig in for a fight, I am not fun.
That said, being on the receiving end of these shenanigans and being responsible for young seasonal employees who are still learning the operation but who are smart, courteous, and hard-working, and watching bitter hags having a bad day just eviscerate these kids makes me realize what a lot of assholes there are in this world. And now that I'm more conscious of it, I see it everywhere that customer service happens: in stores, at the movies, in restaurants...Ev. Ery. Where. Customers are awful, entitled know-it-alls. Sure, sure, there are times when things are legitimately bad and someone needs to do a better job, but just look around and see how often someone in a line near you goes from 0 to subhuman because a grocery clerk needs a price check or won't accept their Canadian currency or asks them to wait a moment while they put out the fire that's just erupted in the trash can.
So the thing is, it takes a little bit of decorum, a little bit of restraint to overcome the junkfood-style satisfaction of being awful in the moment but it's well worth it because in the long run it's kind of soul-crushing. Or it should be, if you're even kind of a good person.
Am I a broken record? Maybe. But if the easiest way to be is awful, it's worth reminding myself and others to be diligent about NOT being so as often as possible.
It's 4 a.m. and I'm about to go to work. Today I will behave as though every customer is an alien new to earth and in need of guidance. Today I will muster an appreciative laugh for lame jokes just to honor the spirit of positivity. Today I'm bringing cupcakes to work just because.
Ready? Go!
The past few weeks at work have been particularly hellacious, an impossible numbers game wherein hundreds of people descend on our five-person operation with everything they own and, owing to a poor understanding of geometry, physics, and the notion that the world doesn't revolve around them, become enraged to find that we can't fit the astonishing pile of consumer goods they've deemed necessary for a weekend getaway on a boat immediately.
Look, I'm no angel where this is concerned. No one ever thinks they're the one being unreasonable, and I'd like to imagine that I can claim the high road. Realistically, though, it takes an extraordinary amount of energy not to trade snark for snark, raised voice for raised voice, veiled insult for veiled insult. I try. Really hard. But while I'm mostly successful in not shooting first, I struggle not to fire back in kind and when I dig in for a fight, I am not fun.
That said, being on the receiving end of these shenanigans and being responsible for young seasonal employees who are still learning the operation but who are smart, courteous, and hard-working, and watching bitter hags having a bad day just eviscerate these kids makes me realize what a lot of assholes there are in this world. And now that I'm more conscious of it, I see it everywhere that customer service happens: in stores, at the movies, in restaurants...Ev. Ery. Where. Customers are awful, entitled know-it-alls. Sure, sure, there are times when things are legitimately bad and someone needs to do a better job, but just look around and see how often someone in a line near you goes from 0 to subhuman because a grocery clerk needs a price check or won't accept their Canadian currency or asks them to wait a moment while they put out the fire that's just erupted in the trash can.
So the thing is, it takes a little bit of decorum, a little bit of restraint to overcome the junkfood-style satisfaction of being awful in the moment but it's well worth it because in the long run it's kind of soul-crushing. Or it should be, if you're even kind of a good person.
Am I a broken record? Maybe. But if the easiest way to be is awful, it's worth reminding myself and others to be diligent about NOT being so as often as possible.
It's 4 a.m. and I'm about to go to work. Today I will behave as though every customer is an alien new to earth and in need of guidance. Today I will muster an appreciative laugh for lame jokes just to honor the spirit of positivity. Today I'm bringing cupcakes to work just because.
Ready? Go!
Thursday, June 21, 2012
Kickstart(er) My Heart
The other day on facebook I saw that a friend of mine loaned money to an El Salvadorean woman to help her buy spare parts for her bicycle repair shop. The woman and her husband started the shop when they were unable to find jobs. Their loan request, for $1200, constitutes approximately a quarter of their yearly income. They requested a similar loan last year and successfully paid it off.
The loan was made through Kiva, an online micro-lender that connects entrepreneurs from around the world with the capital they need to advance their businesses. Each owner creates a profile describing their operation, the improvements the loan will fund, and the target loan amount. Individual investors contribute some portion of the loan until the requested amount is matched. Repayment is generally due over the course of two years, with interest and fees in place.
Within the hour, the same person who made that loan noted that they'd contributed to a Kickstarter campaign for a friend's documentary and encouraged others to support the project.
For people who've been living under a rock or maybe just don't know a lot of hipsters, Kickstarter (and the very similar Indiegogo) is a platform wherein people create accounts describing a project -- movies, albums, and restaurants are pervasive, but ideas run the gamut -- what they need money to accomplish vis a vis the project, and an amount they hope to raise by a target date. Individual investors contribute some portion of the money until that end date. If they succeed in getting the full amount pledged, the project gets the money. If not, they get nothing. Incentives are offered at various levels of support, a la PBS. The rewards generally run from a warm thank you to a t-shirt to a copy of the product, official backer status, etc. These are not loans; the money is not repaid.
What's that you say? These things sound very similar? That's exactly what I was thinking! I'm a little embarrassed that I've been aware of both programs for some time now and never really realized this.
Here's what gets me in the juxtaposition of these two platforms:
One of them procures money primarily for people in poverty-stricken regions, where it's unlikely that any of the contributions come from friends or neighbors, because, well, the friends and neighbors are likewise in some dire financial straits. These entrepreneurs are being offered old-fashioned loans through the banking establishment and are subject to the terms and conditions of old-fashioned loans.
The other procures money primarily from the entrepreneur's friends and neighbors and their extended networks (there are, certainly, donations from strangers, but those are fewer and farther between than the others, celebrity Kickstarters notwithstanding). These are paid back in handshakes and tchochke.
The bottom line is that people for whom this money has very serious financial consequences are taking out business loans through Kiva and paying them back. The people whose friends and larger networks have disposable income to help them make, say, a $3500 monster costume or acquire $850 for the world's largest jock strap are gifted the money in exchange for a high five and a chuckle.
Anyone currently on Kiva would be better served setting up a Kickstarter, and obviously they could. But I'm guessing that very few of the rural entrepreneurs using Kiva have the internet access and savvy to compare their options and lack the social networks that make it a breeze for a millenial Stanford grad to raise $20,000 to fulfill his lifelong culinary-punk dream of owning a food truck called "Blintz-krieg Bop." So the former follows a traditional business model and builds their business the hard way and the latter has the assistance handed to them on a silver platter, no strings attached.
Don't get me wrong, Kiva is a really wonderful and important idea, one that ought to have a huge base of support and really, I'm okay with people helping each other out to accomplish their dream projects on a donation basis. And I think that people who give to either or both have their hearts in the right place, but it's really unfortunate that in tandem they reinforce the bright line in culture and class politics that separates how we as middle and upper-middle class westerners approach giving as patronage, as charity, or as business, to artists, to western businesses, to third world businesses, to NGOs.
It's not difficult to imagine that this formula puts a strain on the available resources. People with a limited amount of disposable income are more likely to fund projects by people they know over a third-world business start up despite the arguably more substantial social and economic return on the latter. Instant gratification is instantly gratifying. Playing that band's CD is a far more tangible outcome than the slightly ephemeral knowledge that somewhere in sub-Saharan Africa a farmer is able to meet the demand for amaranth in his village and provide security for his family.
This is all just a lot of spitballing, but as I've been thinking about it, I've thought of a pretty awesome Kickstarter campaign: A request for money to travel and film Kickstarter videos for people seeking loans on Kiva, effectively giving them both means and access to the more forgiving platform. I think they'd do well in the short-term while the glow of the initial filmmaker's Kickstarter allowed them accesss to his or her extended network, but would likely peter out once awareness fatigue set in. I'd give, as long as I got a high five.
Sunday, May 13, 2012
Here's the Beef: Where's the Beef?
Know what's delicious? Bacon. Know what's a tasty addition to almost everything? Goat cheese. Guess what I ate a lot of in 2010. Give up? Pizza. And quesadillas.
When I went vegetarian and eventually vegan, I didn't suddenly decide that these things don't taste good. I made a decision that my desire for certain flavors really didn't justify the death and suffering that comes with them.
Within the realm of foods that I have no ethical objection to, I eat the ones that taste good when I can, the ones that taste okay when necessary, and avoid the ones that taste bad. Them's some pretty simple criteria. Using this program, I don't reject good tasting food because the ingredients aren't what I expected. I've never, for instance, thought, "Wow, this is the best blueberry pie I've ever eaten, but they thickened it with corn starch instead of flour, so I'll buy that blander one down the street where they use flour."
Which is why, a few short weeks into baking for profit as well as fun, I'm feeling a little frustrated.
I knew going into it that getting vegan food to the general public would be an uphill battle. "Vegan" is a word with a lot of baggage, conjuring images of asceticism and denial, visiting judgment on omni eaters, and linked to its extremist cousin raw foods with all the peculiar culinary acrobatics that go into crafting familiar-food analogs from walnuts and agave syrup. Going in, my plan was to make awesome stuff, send up the vegan Bat-signal to let them know it exists, but not market it specifically as vegan. I'm a child of the 80's and I've internalized the core lesson of the Pepsi challenge: what people like and what they think they like aren't always the same, and that gap is largely a function of ephemeral concerns like image and marketing.
But as it happens, my first customer is a conventional bakery, and the fact that they carry my wares is specifically a function of the fact that I bake without eggs and dairy, an alternative option labeled accordingly. It wasn't necessarily in the original plan, but I'm grateful to have a steady outlet where my stuff sells well. And in the first batch, two sold to my friends, one to a girl whose vegan friend needed cheering up, and one to someone who made no mention of it being vegan. It's a small sample, but it leaves room to hope that I might still appeal to a wider audience even with the scarlet V on the label.
Then I took some samples to a coffee shop. The owner knew before I arrived that the samples were vegan and after asking some questions about ingredients and process she asked, "But you only do vegan, right?"
When I said yes, she got a far-away, disappointed look.
"Okay...it's just that we're looking for someone who can do other things too."
"Well, try the samples and see what you think. If you can taste the difference, more power to you, but I think you'll find they're not any different than conventional," I said.
In the course of our fifteen minute conversation she mentioned that they wanted someone who could do "other things that aren't vegan" at least three times, always wearing a little frown and using that let-you-down-gently tone that says, "It's not you, it's me...no, actually, it's definitely you."
And fine. It's her business, it's her decision, but it's dumb. Not just because I think I make a really great product (which I do), but because it was a decision that very clearly had nothing to do with the actual product and everything to do with her gut reaction to the idea of vegan.
I have a tasting coming up with a large corporate concern to make a bid for snacks at their meetings, etc. I have not mentioned that I'm a "specialty" baker, nor do I plan to. More than one person has asked if I've told them, and to a person they've responded with surprise when I say no, as though I'm planning to scam the elderly out of their pensions.
But I'm not tricking anyone into eating something they object to -- the ingredients are the same as most conventional items, and I'm fairly sure no one's looking to get their protein or calcium from the egg in a cupcake or the scant amount of milk in frosting, so I'm not depriving them of any expected benefit. I'm offering tasty treats. If they reject them because they don't like them, or don't like the price, or because I can't do the volume they need, I can accept that because those are reasonable, reality-based issues. But I won't put myself in a position to lose business based on vague ideas about what a recipe should be like instead of what the product actually is.
Someday I'll have a brick and mortar establishment, a little cafe with pastries and cakes and soups and sandwiches like any other cafe with pastries and soups and sandwiches, except there won't be any meat or animal products. I won't point it out, and most people won't notice. I'm not looking to proselytize, I just want to make awesome food consistent with my ethics and stand or fall on the strength of my skill.
And as my semi-estranged father told me the other day in a moment of casually shocking intimacy, "That's what I've always admired about you...when you want something, you go to the mat to get it."
Thanks, Dad, I guess I do. And I will, I just want a fair fight.
When I went vegetarian and eventually vegan, I didn't suddenly decide that these things don't taste good. I made a decision that my desire for certain flavors really didn't justify the death and suffering that comes with them.
Within the realm of foods that I have no ethical objection to, I eat the ones that taste good when I can, the ones that taste okay when necessary, and avoid the ones that taste bad. Them's some pretty simple criteria. Using this program, I don't reject good tasting food because the ingredients aren't what I expected. I've never, for instance, thought, "Wow, this is the best blueberry pie I've ever eaten, but they thickened it with corn starch instead of flour, so I'll buy that blander one down the street where they use flour."
Which is why, a few short weeks into baking for profit as well as fun, I'm feeling a little frustrated.
I knew going into it that getting vegan food to the general public would be an uphill battle. "Vegan" is a word with a lot of baggage, conjuring images of asceticism and denial, visiting judgment on omni eaters, and linked to its extremist cousin raw foods with all the peculiar culinary acrobatics that go into crafting familiar-food analogs from walnuts and agave syrup. Going in, my plan was to make awesome stuff, send up the vegan Bat-signal to let them know it exists, but not market it specifically as vegan. I'm a child of the 80's and I've internalized the core lesson of the Pepsi challenge: what people like and what they think they like aren't always the same, and that gap is largely a function of ephemeral concerns like image and marketing.
But as it happens, my first customer is a conventional bakery, and the fact that they carry my wares is specifically a function of the fact that I bake without eggs and dairy, an alternative option labeled accordingly. It wasn't necessarily in the original plan, but I'm grateful to have a steady outlet where my stuff sells well. And in the first batch, two sold to my friends, one to a girl whose vegan friend needed cheering up, and one to someone who made no mention of it being vegan. It's a small sample, but it leaves room to hope that I might still appeal to a wider audience even with the scarlet V on the label.
Then I took some samples to a coffee shop. The owner knew before I arrived that the samples were vegan and after asking some questions about ingredients and process she asked, "But you only do vegan, right?"
When I said yes, she got a far-away, disappointed look.
"Okay...it's just that we're looking for someone who can do other things too."
"Well, try the samples and see what you think. If you can taste the difference, more power to you, but I think you'll find they're not any different than conventional," I said.
In the course of our fifteen minute conversation she mentioned that they wanted someone who could do "other things that aren't vegan" at least three times, always wearing a little frown and using that let-you-down-gently tone that says, "It's not you, it's me...no, actually, it's definitely you."
And fine. It's her business, it's her decision, but it's dumb. Not just because I think I make a really great product (which I do), but because it was a decision that very clearly had nothing to do with the actual product and everything to do with her gut reaction to the idea of vegan.
I have a tasting coming up with a large corporate concern to make a bid for snacks at their meetings, etc. I have not mentioned that I'm a "specialty" baker, nor do I plan to. More than one person has asked if I've told them, and to a person they've responded with surprise when I say no, as though I'm planning to scam the elderly out of their pensions.
But I'm not tricking anyone into eating something they object to -- the ingredients are the same as most conventional items, and I'm fairly sure no one's looking to get their protein or calcium from the egg in a cupcake or the scant amount of milk in frosting, so I'm not depriving them of any expected benefit. I'm offering tasty treats. If they reject them because they don't like them, or don't like the price, or because I can't do the volume they need, I can accept that because those are reasonable, reality-based issues. But I won't put myself in a position to lose business based on vague ideas about what a recipe should be like instead of what the product actually is.
Someday I'll have a brick and mortar establishment, a little cafe with pastries and cakes and soups and sandwiches like any other cafe with pastries and soups and sandwiches, except there won't be any meat or animal products. I won't point it out, and most people won't notice. I'm not looking to proselytize, I just want to make awesome food consistent with my ethics and stand or fall on the strength of my skill.
And as my semi-estranged father told me the other day in a moment of casually shocking intimacy, "That's what I've always admired about you...when you want something, you go to the mat to get it."
Thanks, Dad, I guess I do. And I will, I just want a fair fight.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Rutabaga!
![]() |
This happy l'il guy's gonna be the face of Rutabaga Baking. |
Good news, guys. The moment has arrived for me to stop being wistful and get busy.
After lo these many months of mooning about, talking a big, vague game about Finally Doing It, allow me to talk a big, only slightly more specific game.
I'm currently procrastinating on putting together a price list for Rutabaga Baking, for a customer who will receive delivery next week. Until the order's actually in I'll refrain from naming the venue, but that'll follow soon. I'm just too excited to keep it entirely under my hat!
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Daydream Believer
If wishes were horses than beggars would ride, and if I were
half as responsible to myself as I am to other people, I would be self-employed
doing awesome things all day.
I like to think that I’m a free spirit, but I’ve been made
to face the fact (over and over and over again, in fact) that my particular
spirit is rather like a small child:
It craves boundaries, direction, structure in which to exercise its
gifts in a safe and loving environment.
I will take on an extra project at work, but fail to shop
for groceries until my third day of eating nothing but unadorned grits and
Bisquick pancakes with ground pepper (for real), help a friend move or paint an
apartment but leave my laundry until I’m channeling Pigpen from Charlie Brown.
Ask me to do something and give me a deadline. I’ll do it in style, with gusto. I’ll dot
all the I’s with little hearts, wrap up the results in fancy paper and bows, and
deliver it to your door with a curtsy and a flourish.
I’m a diligent ditz, a spazzy robot. I’m a freight train making all its
stops, leaving the mangled corpses of a million grand schemes at every
crossing.
Because there are plenty of things that I do just for myself: I play
my ukulele, make songs, I sing, I sew, I write stories and essays, I walk, I
cook elaborate and not-elaborate meals, I bake and decorate and bake more, I
draw, I build simple electronics and modify the complex, I replicate (with
varying degrees of success) everything that
strikes my fancy from shoes to food to furniture. I MacGuyver the shit out of things. Our VHS library currently resides in a six-shelf condominium fashioned from packing tape and vintage Casio boxes. I build tiny
people in tiny dioramas because tiny things are just so, so satisfying.
But there’s the rub.
There are so many things I want to do just because I want to that if you
put all of the tools for all of those activities in a room, I would end up
running from station to station, flailing my arms like the robot from Lost in Space and finally collapse like a birthday girl when the cake wears off.
I'm heavily motivated by guilt, and I swallow my own excuses easily enough that I don't feel guilty when I let myself down. A friend pointed out today that my goal shouldn't be to make myself feel guilty for breaking promises to myself, but to recognize that my personal projects deserve attention as much as outside jobs do. It's two sides of the same coin, and she's right that the latter would be preferable, but I'm hoping for either at this point.
More than hoping, I'm baby-stepping in that direction. In the past I've looked at this glaring flaw in my operations as something huge and wild and untame-able, something to be acknowledged with a sigh and shrug, but as I cruise into my "grown up" life still holding tight to teenaged optimism, I'm increasingly aware that that's both really counterproductive and ultimately soul-crushing.
I like my job a lot as far as working for someone else goes, but as my ten year anniversary approaches, I shudder at the thought of another decade, or even another five years.
When I started this blog I hinted at a big project in the works, and I'm happy to say that I'm actually working on it. This is in no small part thanks to the community of wonderful people around me, friends and family and co-workers, who nudge me when I'm flagging keep my alternately inflated and flattened ego in reality. In the end, it would be great if I could be accountable to myself, but I consider it a good start to be accountable to the people who care about and believe in me.
In the very short term, I'm working on a web project, aggregating all of my projects into one space. It's a relatively passive endeavor, but it's useful for taking stock. In the next month or two my art, this blog, Giant Marshmallow Pillow (it's not dead, it's sleeping), and my first stab at a commercial baking endeavor will find a new home together. Like most things I do, it's happening in fits and starts because the ol' squirrel in my noggin keeps running off to check out other stuff, plus I decided to go all out and learn a little bit of WordPress coding just to make things interesting.
So thanks to everyone who humors me and challenges me and keeps me on track. I'll be sure to give you all presents tied up in fancy paper with a curtsy and a flourish.
I'm heavily motivated by guilt, and I swallow my own excuses easily enough that I don't feel guilty when I let myself down. A friend pointed out today that my goal shouldn't be to make myself feel guilty for breaking promises to myself, but to recognize that my personal projects deserve attention as much as outside jobs do. It's two sides of the same coin, and she's right that the latter would be preferable, but I'm hoping for either at this point.
More than hoping, I'm baby-stepping in that direction. In the past I've looked at this glaring flaw in my operations as something huge and wild and untame-able, something to be acknowledged with a sigh and shrug, but as I cruise into my "grown up" life still holding tight to teenaged optimism, I'm increasingly aware that that's both really counterproductive and ultimately soul-crushing.
I like my job a lot as far as working for someone else goes, but as my ten year anniversary approaches, I shudder at the thought of another decade, or even another five years.
When I started this blog I hinted at a big project in the works, and I'm happy to say that I'm actually working on it. This is in no small part thanks to the community of wonderful people around me, friends and family and co-workers, who nudge me when I'm flagging keep my alternately inflated and flattened ego in reality. In the end, it would be great if I could be accountable to myself, but I consider it a good start to be accountable to the people who care about and believe in me.
In the very short term, I'm working on a web project, aggregating all of my projects into one space. It's a relatively passive endeavor, but it's useful for taking stock. In the next month or two my art, this blog, Giant Marshmallow Pillow (it's not dead, it's sleeping), and my first stab at a commercial baking endeavor will find a new home together. Like most things I do, it's happening in fits and starts because the ol' squirrel in my noggin keeps running off to check out other stuff, plus I decided to go all out and learn a little bit of WordPress coding just to make things interesting.
So thanks to everyone who humors me and challenges me and keeps me on track. I'll be sure to give you all presents tied up in fancy paper with a curtsy and a flourish.
Labels:
dreams,
focus,
friends,
goals,
responsibility,
spazzy robot,
work
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)