Why Write?

The Bloganuary question today: Why do You Write?

Why do I write? God only knows.

You know, that may be as good an answer as any other.

Oh, I could give some down-to-earth reasons: I write to inform, to share images and concepts, to communicate, to give others a smile. I hope to entertain through the stories I write.

I may have altruistic reasons: a desire to improve the lot of my fellow human beings. Think of Charles Dickens. His stories had a huge impact on the attitudes of his readers. Through his writing, this one man effected a great change in the society he wrote for.

I write because I’ve met our Father, and hope to share with other children what I’ve learned about him. Tell them He’s not an amorphous, indifferent force somewhere in the universe, but a divine Parent who can, and wants to, speak with us and guide us.

I could give some self-centered thoughts: I have opinions and want to share them. Because, like most other folks on this planet, I think I see issues clearly. Or I may dream of gaining a name, respect, some dough. Alas, fat chance!

All the above may factor into why I write but if I were all alone on a desert island with a scribbler and a pencil, I’d still write. I’m an observer, a recorder, an enthusiast of interesting words.

I write because I’m hard-wired to write and to share my thoughts, just as some people are hard-wired to act. Some others on this desert island would be swinging an axe, felling trees, building a decent shelter. I’d be describing the trees, the flora & fauna, the moods of sea and sky.

Lastly…and this old autograph-book verse puts it so well:

Some people write for fortune,
some people write for fame.
I write to be remembered
so here I’ll sign my name.

The Sky, Once Fallen

The Bloganuary Challenge today asks the question, “How are you brave?”

My first reply was: I’m not. I’m a very fearful person by nature. Someone once said, “You’ve faced breast cancer (1980) and leukemia (2012 and now again.) You must be very brave.” However, a person steps into, or endures, different things simply because she has to. The option–in this case, dying–is unacceptable.

As to the question at hand: I suppose I could say I’m brave when it comes to THEORIES. Brave, or cynical, or maybe a heretic. If everyone around you has accepted a theory as absolute fact and you say, “Don’t believe it,” that makes you a heretic, right? Well, I don’t jump on “The-sky-is-falling!” platforms or panic at the current conspiracy theories.

For example, when we first heard about COVID-19 I read so many warnings, so many Spanish ‘flu comparisons and horrifying predictions. No influenza can be taken lightly. Yes, we need to take precautions, both for our own sake and for the sake of folks around us. But my thinking was: Let’s be sensible here. The sky is falling every day for someone — and there are a lot worse ways it can hit you than with COVID-19.

Husband and I had a discussion lately about Chicken Little’s tale. Chickens will very soon get into a panic and start flapping around; this tale likens them to humans responding to false alarms. One difference I see, though: chicken by nature may soon get agitated, but I doubt they enjoy this state. Humans, on the other hand, curiously enjoy the frisson of being terrified and/or put in a panic. (Check the bestseller list if you don’ believe me.)

Media folks have tapped into this basic human desire for excitement and made lucrative careers from agitating and scaring people. But I wonder: can the blue sky above, once everyone says it’s fallen, be too hard to see again? Can common sense, so often buried by fear, be hard to take hold of again?

I’m afraid of wild animals, difficult situations, menacing strangers, people being upset with me. But theories and giant conspiracies, I can face bravely.

Perspectives

The Ragtag Daily Prompt word this morning is HELLACIOUS, a word I’ve never used. Anything with the word HELL in it should be terrible. Horrific. Extremely annoying. Even prompter Martha thinks it’s mean. Spell-Check refuses to recognize it. 🙂

I was amazed when I looked it up on Lexico; this word has a milder definition than I expected:
– remarkable, astonishing
– formidably difficult

Merriam-Webster starts out with the darker sense:
– exceptionally powerful or violent
– remarkably good
– extremely difficult
– extraordinarily large

The Ukrainian couple recently arriving in Canada described fleeing a hellacious situation in their homeland.
Willy faced a hellacious mountain of debt.
George & Mabel Smith just won a hellacious windfall in the lottery.

A Suitable Adjective

Frustrated again this morning with the non-workings of WordPress, I toyed with the idea of deleting my account and starting over. As they say, “Using a shotgun to kill a fly.”

Or perhaps I should get a new e-mail address and switch everything over to that, as the g-mail address seems to be the issue: “This is e-mail is attached to an account you are not currently logged into.” But it’s attached to my WordPress account, so what’s the problem?

For some blogs I must constantly log in to leave a comment – even if I’ve already been there and commented ten minutes ago. And I can’t LIKE anyone’s comment, or response to mine, on any other blog. A prompt to Log In flashes, but disappears before I can do anything. Sometimes I’m asked to log in, but even when I do, if I hit the LIKE button nothing happens. Annoying.

Yesterday I spotted an odd URL on the post I was about to publish. I tried to fix it because it didn’t look right. Got it again on my evening post, but just left it as it was and published anyway. It didn’t show up in the final link. Strange – have I never noticed before? Has my blog been hijacked?

Perspectives

I think of the Ukrainian couple in Moose Jaw who shared their story of invasion. Undisciplined Russian soldiers pouring into their city, the bodies of defenders lying in pieces all over. Soldiers going through homes raping women and children, torturing people. No power half the time. Living in the hallway of their apartment, fearful of bullets and flying glass. Hellacious like being like hell.

Frame of Reference

Most of the adjectives we choose are based on our frame of reference. what we’re used to. How different something is from what we expect, what we hope for. A glorious sunset or a dreary rain on parade day. Instant results or shambling slowness. Sometimes I’ll put up with inconvenience because I’m lazy languorous and hope it will change without my having to do anything major.

This couple lived through their nightmare for three months, hoping to wake up one morning and find the war over. Believing this terrible invasion would end soon and life would get back to normal. Finally they had to leave everything behind and flee for their lives.

I did call once and was assured everything’s working as it should. Now I have to call WordPress again and get this sorted out. Meanwhile, Ill see if I can get this posted without too much trouble.

Perspectives.

Image: conger designs — Pixabay

Contentions

The Ragtag Daily Prompt this morning is CHANGELING

Merriam-Webster gives these definitions:
Turncoat (archaic)
One child exchanged for another at birth, (usually a fairy child)
Imbecile
(archaic)
And I’m going to go with the first meaning, though it be rather archaic.

Illustration by ArtTower — Pixabay

No Changing Allowed!

Sister stamped her foot in fury. “Changeling! Turncoat! Traitor to the cause!”

“I’ve seen the light,” Brother responded. “It’s not an issue.”

“You were on my side before. Now you’re wimping out.”

“Having given the matter serious thought, I’ve realized that one choice is as good as the other.” Brother maintained his calm tone. “It’s no big deal.”

“Ha! If you’d been in Boston before the Tea Party, you’d probably have said ‘It’s no big deal. Let’s just pay the tax and not rock the boat’.

“It might have saved a war.”

“Heretic!” Sister punched his arm. “And this is a big deal!”

“Everybody raves about how great peace is. ‘NO MORE WAR,’ they say. But soon as they get passionate about some issue, they’re ready to take up arms. Like you now.”

“You must have been switched for my real brother at the hospital. If you were my true brother you’d see things like I do.”

Brother scowled. “Wow! Talk about over-reacting.”

“Somebody needs to remind you of what you said last month when this issue first came up. You’ve done a 180 switch.”

“All I said was, I think we should…”

“But you said just the opposite last month. You agreed with me then. Changeling. Traitor.”

Finally Dad spoke up. “Okay, you two. Rather than fighting about this – ”

“I’m not fighting about it,” Brother protested. “She is.”

“I’m not fighting, either! I’m just saying he can’t change his mind like this. Last month we decided we wanted to do Sea World. Now he’s saying let’s go to Yellowstone.”

Dad laid his hand on her shoulder. “Well, I’ll settle the matter. We’ll visit Yellowstone this summer and Sea World next year. End of the skirmish. And no sniping.”

“Who knows if I’ll even be alive next year? The whole world may lay in ashes!”

Dad frowned at her. “No Sniping. End of subject.”

Books: Gone To Green

The Green Series, Book 1

© by Judy Christie;
Published by Brosette & Barnhill Publishing LLC (March 12 2016)
This book is free through Kindle Unlimited

One day Lois’s good friend and work colleague, Ed, tells her how he has planned his retirement from the hectic life of big city news. He’s bought a newspaper in the peaceful town of Green, Louisiana. Owning and operating a small-town paper was his dream, but just as he’s about to take the reins as owner of The Green News-Item, he has a fatal heart attack. He’d made a will and Lois is amazed to discover that he chose to leave this new business to her.

Thus Lois, a thirty-year-old single city news editor, finds herself in possession of a small town newspaper in the deep South, a world unfamiliar to her. While she had been hoping for a promotion in her own sphere, Lois goes down to Green and has a look around. The town and the small local newspaper appeal to her, so she decides to give it a whirl — for Ed’s sake.

Meeting the staff, learning the ropes, getting used to the community; she sees why the adventure had so much appeal to Ed. Most of the Green citizens she meets are kind, friendly, easy-going folks, great to work with. She also meets the kind high school coach who lives down the road from her new home and drops by often just to chat. She realizes this is someone she’d like to get to know better.

But even small towns can have their greedy types and corruption. Her main reporter gets a whiff of something rotten in some local VIP’s proposed property development and she gets glimpses of possible racial prejudice involved in the new development scheme. Ready to stand up for civil rights, Lois encourages her reporter to go after the story, but if they expose local dirty-dealing, the paper may be headed for a hot gumbo.

The plot thickens when she gets a call from another former colleague, suggesting an attractive offer’s coming up back home. “A great offer…you should grab this opportunity.” A big newspaper chain comes up with an offer to purchase the Green News-Item. Decisions, decisions!

I really enjoyed this book and give it five stars. It’s well written, believable, holds a readers interest, and has an old-fashioned flavor. No immorality — and the story line is great. Makes you want to visit the place, drop in on her and say “Hi.” And this is the first in a series, so we can keep on reading about Lois’s newspaper newspaper crusading adventures in Green, LA. I’ve read the second book and enjoyed it just as much. I see three more have been published since.

Ragtag Daily Prompt for today: COLLEAGUE

This Constant Call to Judge

My Thoughts on Facts, as Presented by Pro-s and Anti-s

Another attempted coup against the government of Prinstonia has been thwarted. Inside sources report that a group of anarchists calling itself the Citizens’ Coalition launched an attack yesterday but the National Army were successful in routing the rebels and restoring order to the country. Prime Minister Jerimeau, appearing in a news conference this morning, lauded the swift action of the National Army to avert anarchy.

Another attempt was made yesterday by the Citizens’ Coalition to oust the dictatorship now governing the country of Prinstonia. Inside sources report that the National Army, in a bloody battle for control, ruthlessly crushed the attempted coup by Coalition soldiers. Prime Minister Jerimeau, the tyrant who has been holding the country in an iron grip for the past five years, appeared in a news conference this morning, obviously gloating over the victory.

You be the Judge. Which report are you going to believe?

Every day readers around the world are bombarded with news, actual happenings infused with carefully crafted opinions. Daily the media invites us to pass judgment on situations we know little or nothing about. Journalists and editors offer their opinion on what’s going on and how sensible people should feel about it. Thus they bring public pressure to bear on — and usually against — any government or decision. However, the pressure generated is based almost wholly on what’s been written by said journalists and editors. Forty years ago my husband commented that the Press considers itself the official opposition, and in the time since, I’ve seen that to be true.

In the account above, Prime Minister Jerimeau may be a tyrant – or he may be a half-decent sort who truly has the welfare of his country at heart. He may be ruthlessly clutching at power – or he may be trying hard to hold together the various rebellious factions in a quavery sort of peace. He may be lining his pockets – but that in itself doesn’t mean he’s out to crush his people. A stable country where the citizens can go about their business without fear is always going to be better off, even if the big cheeses have mansions and the PM has his own private jet, than one in constant civil war.

Are We Living in an Anti- Age?

Doesn’t it seem these days that if anyone squawks about being oppressed by their rulers, people are more inclined to be sympathetic than skeptical? I get the impression at times that news articles are more apt to support anti-government, anti-status quo groups than voices from the pro-side of things. In any country, at any time, there will always be the dissatisfied “if we were in charge we’d do things right,” types – and the media seems only too happy to find them and air their vitriol. But they’re feeding us the news we want. “Looming civil war” sells. “Everyone’s content” is so hohum.

I wonder how much our inclinations have been shaped by the anti-establishment, anti-status quo, anti-materialistic thinking of the ’60s? We know there must be law and order – we and our own cushy lifestyle would not survive long in a war zone. But do we still have a bit of that 60s sentiment running through our veins that inclines us to favor rebels? And is the media giving us regular infusions of the same?

Examples in history show that rebels who kidnap and murder to destabilize the current government are very apt to continue the practice once they do get into power. Also, though they are certain they could do so much better at running things, rebels seldom have a clear plan for the future — except to wipe out all the last guys.

A Few Historical Examples

No Proposed Plan:
Prior to the US Civil War the Anti-Slavery league had noble goals and great rhetoric. The cause was just; things needed to change. Feeling of compassion were fanned and many Northerners were truly concerned about the suffering victims. More philosophical sorts considered slavery a blot on the country; it must be wiped out. However, it seems no one had a “where to from here” plan, either for restoring the shattered American union or bettering the lot of the now homeless, jobless, landless, illiterate, former slaves. They were mostly left to shift for themselves as best they could in a very hostile environment.

An Idealistic But Untried Plan:
During World War I the Russian government was in a disastrous downward spiral and the peasants were starving. Along came Vladimir Lenin, anti-monarchist, anti-bourgeoisie, enthused about Karl Marx’s brilliant plan for a utopian society based on share and share alike. However, when put into practice, communism just created a new bunch of tyrants and an oppressive, ineffective government.

The “We’ll Get It Right” Plan:
Prohibition had actually been tried in the state of Georgia in the late 1700s. The law was rescinded after seven years seeing as folks kept right on drinking; farmers found operating a still more profitable than farming; juries were lenient toward offenders; rum-runners from nearby states were making mint. Had the Temperance leaders circa 1900 studied this and taken to heart the results, they could have saved North America a LOT of woe. Or maybe they did know, but decided, “We’ll do it better and it will work this time.”

Yes, the big pushes behind the anti-drinking movement, the churches and the Womens’ Christian Temperance Movement, were very optimistic about their ability to reform human nature. And they were actually doing a good work of promoting temperance — until they took it into the political arena. They meant well and thought legally turning off the tap would finally stop the thirst for liquor. They never dreamed that Prohibition would so foster organized crime.

Sadly, Christians are still far too inclined to push plans they feel will benefit mankind and refuse to accept what the Bible says about non-Christian thinking, that it is “not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” Coming from an non-Christian background myself, I can testify that making Christian moral rules for people who are not Christian is a kind of self-delusion. You kid yourself that “In our country we don’t allow…” while the average Joe just finds ways around the rules.

A Current Example of Compassion But No Plan
In the past few years I’ve seen many stories about the plight of children caught at the US-Mexican border. Accounts of “children being ripped from their parents’ arms” – though some workers in that area do question whose children these really are – and now being held in detention centers in Texas. I’m seeing a lot of criticism and condemnation of the US govt and the President, but no practical fix-it for this sad situation. Should they just turn all those children loose to fend for themselves? Hall them all across the border and dump them? Allow all those illegal aliens to reclaim their children and make them US citizens, thus sending the signal for more to come?

I have many questions about all this. Why did these people suddenly start coming? Who led them to believe they could now successfully sneak into the US?
Somebody has created this unique situation; what was their motive? Was this sudden influx somehow a cleverly engineered plan to force, or embarrass, the US administration?
What if all the concerned, critical Americans would rather offer to take in, and be responsible for, these children? Like foster care? Would that help?
This would show genuine compassion rather than simple anti-Trump vitriol. But there are so many children in the US foster care system now that need homes, too. Alas, it’s all beyond me!

Being Overfed Isn’t Healthy

In our day we have so many conflicting voices, so many people pointing us this way and that. This pressure adds a lot of stress to our lives as we’re almost forced to decide on issues we know so little about. We’re being “fed” – and sometimes the fare is toxic, giving us heartburn and high blood pressure. But just because the media wants to feed us doesn’t mean we have to swallow everything they’re offering us. We can resist emotional pleas that overlook so many factors. Generally, it’s best to reserve judgment until we’ve done some serious digging to find the facts.

Sometimes we have to hit the OFF button. Knowing my own limitations, I can’t have the weight of the world’s woes pressing on my mind and be an emotionally healthy person.