Watching This is Like Watching Clueless: HBO's New Series GIRLS

Over the past few weeks, my social networks have been abuzz about the new HBO series, Girls. Girls is the brainchild of Lena Dunham who is currently a media darling after her film Tiny Furniture was received with much acclaim on the festival circuit. The 26 year-old Dunham, who writes and directs Girls, also stars in the show as the character Hannah. Among my contacts, the Judd Apatow produced show has received mixed reviews but I decided to watch the pilot (currently available on YouTube) and give it a chance. This is my take and I would warn you that there may be some spoilers in the following so you may want to watch first and read the rest of this after you watch.

The pilot begins with the character Hannah having dinner with her parents at what appears to be a fancy restaurant. As she shovels food into her mouth, her parents being to slowly reveal that they no longer wish to bankroll her New York City lifestyle. We find out Hannah has been out of college for two years now and is working an internship while trying to finish writing her memoirs. At the time of this writing, I'm just a couple of years older than Dunham as I'm going on 28 years-old in July. When I was two years out of college, I wasn't working an unpaid internship while my parents paid for all of my expenses. On the contrary, I had to work. Immediately following graduation, I found a job. Not particularly well paid compared to some of the jobs my classmates landed at financial firms, but it was a job nonetheless — it paid the bills. In Girls, the prospect of having to try and find a job horrifies Hannah and she spend most of the rest of the scene arguing with her parents and trying to convince them to continue to financially support her. I know lots of twenty-somethings, and most of them don't behave this way.

Later in the episode, we are introduced to Hannah's best friend Marnie played by the stunning Allison Williams. Williams actually feels like the most realistic character. She is portrayed as an ice queen as her boyfriend clearly likes her far more than she likes him. Marnie and Hannah even discuss the possibility of Marnie potentially breaking up with him because he is simply too nice for Marnie. This character is at least self aware as she notes "I feel like such a bitch" for wanting to dump a guy who, as far as we know, has been nothing but doting. However, I have a qualm with this scene: who hangs out in the tub naked with their girlfriends shaving their legs together? I dormed in college and, Judd Apatow, I can assure you this probably happens less often than you'd like to believe! Also, we hear that they watch Mary Tyler Moore together but, correct me if I'm wrong, Mary Tyler Moore was a WORKING GIRL. These girls don't seem to do much of anything, but we'll get to that in due time.

To follow the Sex and the City mold, Girls appears to follow four primary protagonists with Dunham playing the lead (the Carrie role, if you will). The next character introduced, Shoshanna, even makes reference to this. She points out her Sex and the City poster to her new roommate, British cousin Jessa. Shoshanna, played by Zosia Mamet, is over the top in her enthusiasm for the show and which Sex and the City character she most embodies. While I don't think it's a stretch, what should have been a nod with a smirk to a former HBO heavyweight and similarly themed series is instead a long, drawn out, drunken overt surly wink. To say it felt forced is an understatement.

When Hannah's character is at her internship, we meet our first minority — the Asian graphic designer who is apparently more valuable than Hannah because she knows Photoshop! Her scene ends swiftly as Hannah's boss interprets her "I can't afford to work for free anymore" comment as "I quit." This then leads Hannah into the arms of her actor lover with whom we can assume she's had an off again, on again history. They wax poetic about the working world and the lover, Adam, confesses that his parents don't support him — wait for it — his grandma does! Adam's grandma gives him $800 a month towards living expenses so, as he puts it, "I don't have to be anyone's slave." At this point, I'm almost ready to turn off the TV and walk away. Again, I'm not in my 30's — I'm a twenty-something with lots of twenty-something friends. My friends who aspire to be actors work their fucking asses off. Most of them work crappy jobs at Starbucks or administrative assistant gigs that give them the flexibility to go out on auditions and work on their personal projects. It's not easy for them and most of them don't have their grandma's giving them what amounts to rent every month.

The interaction between Hannah and Adam is so awkward it hurts. Hannah can stand up to her parents to try and make them give her money but she's weak and powerless when with Adam? She asks Adam to retrieve a condom before they have sex and he replies "I'll consider it." Later, she confides in him about how her rapid weight gain spurred her tattoos to which he replies, "You're not that fat anymore." All of this seems normal to Hannah; she doesn't bat an eye. And their sex scene is probably the worst of it; I know premium television seems to require them, but in this case it really didn't seem necessary at all.

Finally, toward the end of the episode, Hannah — who is now high on some sort of opium tea — decides to storm into her parent's hotel room and demand that they support her because she has a "voice of a generation." If Lena Dunham's voice is the voice of a generation then it clearly isn't mine. Her voice, which I assume is scattered over all these characters, tells of a breed of entitled bratty little girls. In keeping with the entitlement, Hannah pleads "All I'm asking for is $1100 per month every month for the next 2 years." Wow, what I would've given to have someone gift me $1100 per month! Instead, I had to earn it. And to be honest with you, I probably earned that much working while I was in college full time!

The end of the episode leaves a particularly bad taste in my mouth. Hannah's parents check out of the hotel and Hannah wakes up in their hotel room, alone. Her first inclination is to order room service! Yes, room service after her parents explained how they can't afford to, you know, pay for this make-believe lifestyle she leads. Upon finding that the room service tab is fully closed, she decides she should leave before housekeeping comes. On the hotel room desk, she finds an envelope addressed to her with some money. Her parents also left an envelope on the desk for housekeeping. Hannah steals the money left for housekeeping and pockets it before leaving. Oh, and by the way, at the end of the episode we get minority sighting #2; the homeless black man that sings at Hannah as she walks down Sixth Avenue. I thought there were more minorities in New York City, but I guess I'm just mistaken.

One of my friends, who saw this show before I did, described the girls as "vapid" and I can't say I blame her. Girls is a terrible portrayal of elite, entitled twenty-somethings living a fantasy Disney princess life in New York City on borrowed money and/or trust funds. But perhaps I'm not part of the key demographic for this show as I'm not white, I don't live outside my means and I don't have other people footing my cable bill? To be honest, this makes me rather sad. I was looking forward to Girls being an exploration of coming of age as women in a big city where you need to work hard (and sometimes get a lucky break here and there) to survive. Instead, it was a bunch of unredeemable adult characters acting like little girls. But, as the title suggests, maybe that's the point. Though, after that pilot, I won't be sticking around to find out.

Posted on May 4th, 2012 | Tags: , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Captured: One Light Portraits of Anthony

My boyfriend Anthony is probably my greatest model. He is always ready and willing to stand by and let me take his portrait. Secretly, I think he enjoys being in front of the camera a tiny bit (even though he will never admit this). Below are some photos I captured of Anthony with a one light set up. The one light, besides ambient lighting, was a Canon flash unit that I shot through a softbox.

Anthony Test Portrait #1 by Jen Gallardo

Anthony Test Portrait #2 by Jen Gallardo

Anthony Test Portrait #3 by Jen Gallardo

Posted on March 25th, 2012 | Tags: , , , | No Comments

What's the deal with Warby Parker?

As many of the dozens of you who read my blog know, I wear glasses pretty much daily. On a rare occasion, I might break out the contact lenses, but like I said, it is rare. I find that contact lenses put a huge strain on my eyes during the course of a normal work day where I generally sit in front of a computer screen most of the time. And I'm still very scared of laser surgery where they slice open your eye (!) so, yeah, I wear glasses.

I've been wearing the same frames for years now. I originally found them for sale on ebay and purchased them something like 5 years ago. After years of wear, they started to get old so I decided to do a search for new frames again. I looked around and didn't see much I liked. I ended up buying the same frames again but in a different color. These are the frames that I'm wearing now. I really like them, but they are starting to age and it might be that time where I decide to get new glasses (especially with insurance…score!).

My first thought this time was to try a different sort of online purchasing experience. Warby Parker (warbyparker.com) has revolutionized the purchase of glasses by taking the whole experience, with the exception of the eye exam, online. You send them your prescription, pick glasses, and BEHOLD, you have new glasses shipped to your door. Also, they are a company committed to good. For every pair of glasses you buy, they send a pair of glasses to someone in need. I'm a sucker for a good cause.

I'm also a sucker for stalking apparently. After visiting the Warby Parker website once, I kept seeing Warby Parker ads on various websites I visited afterwards (this is not coincidental, by the way…). While I understood they were virtually stalking me (and targeting their ads at me), I did think their frames looked kinda cool. So I decided to consider the idea of buying my glasses online. I could easily get my prescription as my previous year's eye exam would suffice (last year I got prescription sunglasses — again, this is why it is awesome to have eye insurance).

But perhaps the biggest reason why I decided to try Warby Parker was the home try-on service. For no charge, Warby Parker will send you 5 pairs of glasses for you to try on. You keep the glasses for at most 5 days and then return them using the same box you received them in with a pre-paid shipping label also provided in your package. I thought that was the coolest thing since sliced bread. I hate the ordeal of going to the eye place and trying on glasses. I can't really see myself because I'm not wearing glasses. At least if I'm at home, I could put my contacts on and get a truer vision of what I would look like in a certain pair of frames.

I went to their website and picked five frames and I'm fairly certain that either the next day or the day after I received them. They say they put a hold on your credit card (in the event you decide not to return their glasses) but I didn't notice it. The box the frames came in was actually pretty nice as it was felted and neatly separated each plastic-wrapped pair of glasses. I could list the styles I tried on, but at he end of the day, I just wasn't digging them. They were either too small or too big or too narrow. I will keep checking their website to see if they add other styles, but for now, the styles they do offer just aren't a good fit.

That said, the return process was super pleasant. After dropping the package in the mail, I received an email from Warby Parker stating they were processing the return. They also suggested I contact them with any questions I have about their products or if I need help making a selection and getting to the next step. I'm happy to report that this is the only post-try-on solicitation I've received. No crazy sales pressure. No "hey, we are going to add you to our annoying email list." Just really straightforward and direct — which I dearly appreciate!

So, while Warby Parker didn't get my business today. I probably wouldn't hesitate in considering them at another time and definitely recommend them. With the option to try on from the comfort of your home, it's just silly not to try them!

Posted on March 21st, 2012 | Tags: , , | No Comments

Where did all the cowgirls go?

I recently read a blog post by Clay Shirky about the difference between how women talk about their own abilities versus men. He wishes that more women would stand up and exert their influence because women are just as talented, smart and capable as their more effusive male colleagues. I wish for this, too.

In fact, many other women wish for this as well. COO of Facebook Sheryl Sandberg has given many a talk aimed at women. She says that women should take a seat at the table and not count themselves out by default because they want to have a family. Sheryl is living proof that it is possible to maintain a family and still be successful; and she acknowledges the challenges that come with that.

However, she also touches upon the big elephant in the room that many who talk about the disparities between men and women fail to acknowledge. A man who goes for the gold is assertive. A woman who does the same is off-putting at best, and at worst simply labeled a "bitch." Often when I say this, people roll their eyes; Sheryl present a famous Harvard Business school study that proves this is not simply "women getting easily offended" or "being emotional" (which, by the way, is another topic for another day).

It's an issue that permeates regardless of industry. In politics, Hilary Clinton was often given that label. Her wardrobe of pants suits and "attack dog" stance during her campaign gave her a harsh exterior in the public eye to both women and men. Tina Fey of Saturday Night Live commented on the whole thing and turned it into a positive with the saying "Bitches get shit done."

I love that sketch because I sympathize. I am good at my job. I get things done. If that wasn't true, I wouldn't now be earning nearly triple what I was offered upon graduation in 2006 (in a "bad economy", to boot!). However, as a result of my focus on process, keeping on schedule, and GSD (getting shit done), I am sure that there are many colleagues, past and present, who think I'm a bitch. In fact, I can name them (and there are, unfortunately, women among them).

And the truth of the matter is, I'm not a difficult person to work with. Despite going to school for Computer Science, I'm self-taught at a lot of things, lousy at some others and definitely still have quite a bit to learn. This invigorates me to learn more but also terrifies me at the same time; being in technology, I sometimes feel the need to know everything and be on the cutting edge. This isn't necessarily true, but motivates me to keep on my toes and at the very least stay relevant in a few things (and, given current trends, looks like my decision not to dive head first into Flash development wasn't so bad after all).

But the point of writing this wasn't to brag about myself. The point is that yes, women need to step up to the plate more to brag and take credit — myself included. Often times, we shy away or defer to others when we know what the right answer is. This is a problem of self-doubt and wavering self-esteem that perhaps everyone has at times but tends to be more evident among women. However, the flip side of that is let's call a spade a spade. When a woman steps up, do we encourage it? Or do we add to this doubt — do we doubt her abilities because of predisposed notions?

A lot of people don't like to hear the "as a woman, it's hard out there…" speech, but it is. I can only speak from personal experience here so I will tell a short story that I think illustrates the point. I remember looking for internships while I was in college. I didn't have a ton of relevant experience but I had done freelance web design/development for some local bands while in high school and could show some of that work if necessary. In addition, my part-time work study job was helping out at a public school in Brooklyn where I become the defacto computer expert as I refurbished and networked together old Macs and Windows PCs that were previously merely taking up space in the back of the fourth grade classroom. So, while I didn't have a lot of experience on paper, I felt pretty confident I could land a crappy internship at a record label for $8 per hour (and most likely consist of lame administrative work).

I went to the interview in midtown Manhattan. The office building was not glamorous (this was a small, indie label that worked on re-releases of older records) and the office itself was pretty rundown. I was introduced to several men in the office. They were all men. I made a note of the fact that I did not see a single woman in their office. I spoke with the man who interviewed me and explained my skills and background. He nodded and didn't seem impressed; I was unable to really tell if he was unimpressed or if it was just a really good poker face. After I finished my talk, he asked me if I would be willing to take a typing test.

"A typing test?" I responded.

He said, "Yeah, we hired a girl before that couldn't type so we just want to make sure whoever we hire can type."

I made a mental note of the fact that he said they hired a "girl" before. I put two and two together but typed out a stupid sentence from the cover of an LP anyway. When I left the interview, I knew, without a doubt, that I would not be offered the position because I was a woman.

Since then, I've seen the "boys clubs" at certain offices. I've seen the quizzical looks or passive aggressive emails when I've (correctly, I might add) critiqued a colleague's work. Today, in fact, I received an email that did just that. I don't think the email would have been as questioning if I were a male colleague. Perhaps I'm thinking into this too much, but perhaps I'm not.

Before I am crucified, I have to say that the majority of the men I have worked with have not been like this. The majority have been great and accepting of a lady on their team. To my credit, I like sports which greatly improves my ability to relate. My personal theory (because I took Psychology 101 does not mean this is truth so please take it with a grain of salt) is that the gender roles we grow up with have a great bearing on how we interact with folks of the opposite sex. As soon as you take a car out of a girl's hand and put it in a boy's hand, you've implicitly created an impact on the capabilities of each.

While that may be hard to break, it certainly is not impossible to educate better on the implicit sexism that comes across more often than we care to admit in our interactions at work. However, this means that leveling the playing field is not so simple. Per Clay Shirky's post, this is also a rant with no immediate answer. My hope is I've illuminated some issues that can start discussions in favor of a positive, more inclusive future.

Posted on December 1st, 2011 | Tags: , , , , , | No Comments

Observation on Museums

I'll preface this by saying that maybe this opinion is largely the way it is because I'm a (relatively) young person.

I'm a member of both the Metropolitan Museum of Art ("The Met" for short here in New York City) and the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA). I started with MoMA membership a year ago and decided to renew this year. The MoMA is a cool place to hang out, has lots of exhibitions of interest to me, and is pretty accessible to my house by train. This year, I decided to get a membership to The Met. I was mostly attracted by the Alexander McQueen exhibit (I won't lie to you, the opportunity to skip to the members line and avoid a 2+ hour wait was appealing) but I've been to The Met many times before and there are some pieces of their permanent collection that really speak to me. Additionally, I discovered that they have a killer roof deck that overlooks Central Park.

That said, I don't make use of these memberships nearly enough. I wish I could find more time to go, particularly during members-only hours when I could really make the best use of my membership in avoiding the herds of tourists. However, I've noticed some differences in how these museums speak to me as a member and thought it might make interesting fodder for my blog (which, I know, I haven't updated in quite a few months).

I find that MoMA is a lot better at asking for money than The Met is; and I should mention that this doesn't mean that MoMA contacts me more frequently about it. Actually, the reverse is true! I get a lot of mail from The Met asking me for money and I just became a member in August of this year. I would understand if I was reaching the end of my membership period and they were looking to retain me, but it's only been a few months. To be honest, the excessive asking is making me consider NOT renewing my membership next year.

On the contrary, I find MoMA's ask to be less, well, annoying because not only does it happen less frequently, but I get much more useful content from MoMA on a regular basis. Every month, I get a booklet from MoMA that tells me what is going on at the museum. It's a tall narrow book (it looks sort of like a Zagat guide in size) so it is easily portable in case you wanted to take it with you to the museum. In addition, as a member of their "Film Plus" program, I get one or two emails a month about specials screenings that I am able to attend gratis with that membership. These emails even go so far as to make it easy for you to RSVP. If you click on "YES" in the email, you get routed to where you can complete your RSVP. If you click on "NO," they know you are not attending and will stop contacting you about that event.

Now, fast forward to today, I check my mail and find two items from The Met. One is a monthly members calendar and the other is a fall bulletin. I find this confusing. Why mail me two things? Just send me one thing, and kill less trees. The fall bulletin is a large magazine-sized book but on the outside of it is yet another ask for money. I'm not so much bothered by the ask as much as the fact that this jacket on the outside of the fall bulletin was covering a wrap-around cover that featured the restored painting of Washington crossing the Delaware, which looks pretty freakin' cool. Why would you cover that? And apparently the fall bulletin is a lot of in depth information about the restoration of that painting. Very interesting stuff. How about putting the ask for money in the middle of the book? So while I'm perusing it and realizing how hard you guys work, I can think about donating before the year's end.

Instead, I'm annoyed because you keep asking me for money in all the wrong ways and compelled to blog about it!

Posted on November 22nd, 2011 | Tags: , , , | No Comments

Magazines and Women

I'm a big fan of magazines. While I usually stick with fashion magazines, lately I've been reading some other more business oriented titles. This year, Anthony and I started our own company for our personal pursuits and I felt really lost throughout the process. So when I got the opportunity to redeem some points for magazine subscriptions, I decided to go with a few titles that would help me wrap my head around our business needs. I subscribed to Inc Magazine, Entrepreneur and Fast Company.

I've really enjoyed my subscription to Inc Magazine. I find their articles to be super informative and their interviews, like recent ones with execs from Tumblr and Kid Robot, to be truly inspiring. And, for what it's worth, I appreciate the attention to detail in the graphic layout of the pages themselves. I love that it's a happy marriage of helpful content and creative design. I also like that the magazine is not written for a particular gender. Women and men alike can pick it up and get something out of it. This is not to say that every magazine should do this, but it's nice that a magazine marketing towards small business owners does not discriminate.

Unfortunately, I can't say the same for Entrepreneur. Now, working in technology in various industries, I've realized it's a boy's club — not that that's entirely a bad thing! I've worked with some pretty talented men and learned a lot from them (most notably that the lack of women in their midst is mostly an oversight, not intentional). I also happen to like a lot of things men typically like more than most women (sports, fried foods, gadgets) so it doesn't really bother me to spend time in the company of dudes.

That said, there are definite differences between me and my male colleagues. For example, it is probably not socially acceptable for them to wear dresses, or bare their legs at all at work. Though, if I were to wear baggy jeans and oversized t-shirts as they do, I would probably have some difficulty being taken seriously (I don't say this to be contrary; I say this because it actually happened to me).

And this point precisely brings me back to Entrepreneur magazine. Their September issue, which just arrived in my mailbox today, included an article about over-dressing vs under-dressing; the cover simply reads "Exclusive. How to Dress: The Taxonomy of Casual." I was really excited to read that piece because I struggle with this point when dressing myself for work. I don't want to dress too formally (or too trendy, per the industry I'm currently in…) and risk ostracizing myself from my colleagues but I still want to dress in a way that will gain respect (the whole "dress for the job you want" thing).

I read the article and was really disappointed to see it was written for a target audience of 100% men. The graphic associated with the article showed ONLY cartoon-y male characters wearing different types of dress. The depiction of only men didn't stop me from reading the article though, as there as no indication that this article was merely discussing menswear. I think that's probably what surprised me the most; though the article in question was written by an editor at Esquire, it wasn't explicitly stated that this was a "man's guide" to dressing. They had just inferred that only men would be reading it.

This unfortunately begs the question: are women not considered entrepreneurial? I think we all know what the answer to that is and I'm sure it is backed up by data that suggests that most of their subscribers are men or that more men start companies or get VC funding. Despite the data, whatever it may be, why isolate your female readers? Would it have been that difficult to provide a more balanced piece? Considering they hit up Esquire to write about work appropriate clothes, how about consulting an editor of woman's magazine to briefly touch on women's wear? Surprisingly, it is not for lack of women on the cutting room floor; the editor in chief of the magazine is indeed a woman.

I brought this up to the network of women I know and many agreed with my sentiments. In fact, one commented that she has seen technology magazines in airports under the "Men's interests" section. Why is technology only a man's interest? While I acknowledge that there is a dearth of women in tech, that doesn't automatically exclude women from possibly being interested in such publications.

And this is the fundamental flaw – the imposition of gender roles that deny the existence of quite a few people. By writing that article for an audience of men, you are further impressing the position that entrepreneurs are exclusively men. A more balanced article, including women even in small part, would at least acknowledge that there are indeed female entrepreneurs (Yes, really. They exist! And highlighting only those who start cupcakes businesses is not at all representative of the majority of women who own businesses!).

Perhaps I'm more sensitive to these issues being that I'm both a woman and an underrepresented minority, but I'm willing to imagine that I'm not the only woman who picked up the magazine and was just plain bummed to see that she was excluded from participating in that feature.

Posted on August 19th, 2011 | Tags: , , , , , | No Comments

Captured: The Things We Carry

Last year, I was inspired by a photo project going around (as well as countless magazines I'd purchased) that showed the inner contents of a person's handbag. I think you can tell a lot about a person by what they carry with them day in and day out. As you can see above, those are the contents of my bag as of July 7th 2011, when this photo was taken.

It's quite a different spread compared to 2010:

The biggest difference to me is the cellphone. I've replaced the Blackberry Pearl and Black & Red notebook with an iPhone. It's funny to think that it's only been a year and yet having the iPhone has completely changed my way of life — for the better! Although, I'm still a fan of paper and have been known to carry around notebooks too. I still can't type fast enough on my iPhone to get the ideas out whereas with a notebook I can speed through them.

The other big difference is the lighting. The 2010 photo was making use of available light and as a result was not the right color temperature (thus why it's greyscale) and a bit underexposed. The 2011 photo is still a little darker than I would've liked, but made use of bounced Speedlight flash (I bounced off the ceiling) to illuminate the items and details therein. However, the lens I used for this year's photo is not as great in quality so I still feel it's a bit off. In addition, my current camera isn't as great about capturing low light as the camera I'd like to buy soon. So next year, it will be better!

Posted on July 28th, 2011 | Tags: , , , , , , , | No Comments

I'm not a water snob but…

I'm not a water snob. A water snob, in my book, is a person who is very particular to which brand of water their allegiances lie. A water snob may in fact not drink any water out of any tap, regardless of how much fluoride may be in said tap water. Water snobs also probably don't accidentally drink any water in the shower, ever.

Now again, I'm not a water snob. I drink tap water if need be, and like it. New York City's water is actually pretty decent, but I've been known to drink tap water in other countries (except for Mexico; I was very careful to be a water snob there due to overwhelming concerns about bacteria in their water supply). I'm generally not picky about Pellegrino or tap at restaurants. And yes, I'm that person who chews on ice chips, well aware that they probably didn't use the filtered water for those.

When it comes to buying bottled water, however, I've become aware that some of it is better than others. Now, I'll preface this by saying that I try to avoid purchasing bottled water. I think the excess plastic is terrible for the environment and the PUR filter on my tap at home does the job pretty well.

That said, sometimes you need to buy bottled water. Normally, I stick with Poland Spring; usually, that's the only thing that's sold by the street vendors or underground subway vendors in New York City. Though apparently (shockingly!) it isn't available on the west coast, at all. I'm going to pretend (and who knows, maybe I'm right?) that its limited availability on the west coast is due to the company wishing to keep a small carbon footprint.

Then, there's the stuff bottled by big business — Dasani (bottled by Coca Cola), Nestle Pure Life, Smart Water. These are all okay. They aren't terrible, and will do okay in a pinch (like, for example, when you need more water than what can fit in your re-usable bottle). I have to say that Pure Life is pretty much like Poland Spring, but with a blue label; tastes fine, though, with the Nestle name, you would have expected it to have a chocolate flavor to it (not that we should aspire to have chocolate-tasting-water, gross!). Or maybe that's just me. I think about Nestle Toll House and Nestle Crunch when I think of their brand.

Finally, the good, the bad, and the ugly.

I'll start with the good and the bad: Fiji water. Fiji water comes in wonderful looking containers (more square than cylindrical) with beautiful flowers on the label. You imagine a lush island with the most amazing water you've ever tasted. What you don't imagine are military juntas selling off the region's most precious resource to us abroad while their own people have no access to it. Not a pretty picture. Great water, but it makes my heart hurt. I really don't want to be stressed when purchasing a bottle of water.

And lastly, there's the ugly — Evian. It's "naive" spelled backwards, which should be evidence alone that there's something not quite right about this water. I can't put my finger on it, but one thing is true, this water tastes like someone sucked the life out of it. I recently bought two large bottles because they were on sale; clearly, there was a very good reason for this.

So, in short, I think I'll just stick to re-filling my Camelbak BPF-free water bottle with what comes out of the tap and, unless I'm on the west coast, buying good old reliable Poland Spring water bottles as needed.

(Oh, and don't get me started on Propel and Vitamin Water – which is more sugar than water – and all the other "flavored" varieties. That's a blog post for another day.)

Posted on July 17th, 2011 | Tags: , , , , , | No Comments

Tina Fey is kinda my hero.

Growing up in New York City demanded some pretty strict parenting on the part of my folks. They never let us walk home from school by ourselves until we were in high school. We were never allowed at sleepovers. And, until my brother came along and found a way to reverse engineer the system, no video game systems (with the exception of the Game Boy, which was most useful to them on long car trips to keep us entertained).

However, at home, they did give us a lot of liberties for which I'm very thankful. We were always showered with gifts at birthdays and Christmas and I remember getting a Barbie for bringing home stellar report cards in grade school. They let us get away with not doing chores. And we even got to stay up really obscenely late on Saturday nights. I remember this pretty clearly because that's when I really got into Saturday Night Live.

SNL is one of the things that made me realize how important living in New York was. The fact that people around the country were watching "live from New York, it's Saturday night!" made me a bit giddy and appreciative. And the show was funny as all hell. I fondly remember the days of Mike Myers, Chris Farley, Phil Hartman, the 5-timers club, the list goes on and on. To this day, I still quote some of those sketches.

As time passed, a new cast came to the forefront. Will Ferrell, Cheri Oteri, Maya Rudolph, and, somewhere in the back writing her ass off, Tina Fey. I wish I had paid more attention to credits back then and realized just how awesome her writing was. It's only now, post tons and tons of Emmys for 30 Rock that I realize just how much of a role model Tina Fey is for, not just me, but lots of ladies out there in fields dominated by guys.

The other day I happened to be in Columbus Circle and made my way over to Borders to pick up Tina Fey's book Bossypants. I'd been meaning to grab it for a while but finally got around to it (and thanks to Borders Rewards, was able to get a hard cover for a bit less money that I would have normally paid). I actually picked it up Wednesday evening and am already more than half way through.

I'm actually kind of astounded by how similar my life experiences seem to hers. Immigrant parents? Check. Nerdy upbringing? Check. People telling you you'd "be really pretty if you lost weight"? Check. Weight loss with the help of Weight Watchers (but you don't go and become their spokesperson…)? Check. Working in a field that's full of guys, and constantly proving that you have a right to be there all the same? Check.

Additionally, I'm really impressed by her ability to not be jaded. I feel like sometimes I have to check myself and make sure I'm not being a douche because I'm feeling a bit jaded about where I'm at for whatever reason. I'm normally a very positive person so I'm always disappointed in myself when I act out of character; in this book, she acknowledges that sometimes you fly off the handle but as long as you keep it in check and aren't insulting or yelling at people, it's probably okay.

Though I feel like I've experienced so much in the working world (freelance, nonprofit, television, film, startup, education…), I have to also acknowledge that I'm still very young. There's quite a bit yet to learn. So, I'll go back to reading Bossypants now and hope that I can soak in what it takes to be accomplished yet still a real (funny) person.

Posted on July 15th, 2011 | Tags: , , , , , , , | No Comments

Writing about writing

Writer's block is particularly frustrating.  It is one of the things that normally keeps me from keeping up on my blog.  What's worse than writer's block?  Writer's corner (which is the spot I've put myself in time and time again where I write about characters with no clear idea of how they will end up).

To elaborate some on my frustration, I'm working on a short silent film screenplay.  I've already taken a short story I wrote and adapted it into my first short screenplay so this would be my second.  That first one was simpler because I already had the story, loosely based on family drama, written in a different format.

Now, however I'm starting from scratch.  And though I have an idea of how I want my characters to behave, I don't really know them yet.  Maybe I need to give them more qualities of people I know in the real world and then the next step will become more clear?  That will probably be my first step as my first script was a little bit easier given that I was thinking about my uncle and his relationship with one of his daughters.

But that said, eventually I need to make the decision.  In photography, there's this term that Henri Cartier-Bresson used to describe the moment at which you snap a photo just before the subject takes an action — "the decisive moment."  For me, I need to figure out how the characters will get to that moment and then what choice they will make when they get there.  This is the tough part.

What are my characters made of?  I'm still not sure I know, but when I have the time, I'll have fun trying to figure that out.  Though frustrating at times, I do enjoy writing (if only for the ability to throw caution to the wind and make stuff up).  When I finish this script, hopefully I'll have the gravitas to actually shoot it and put it up here for mass consumption!  For now, I'm off to go finish it.

Posted on June 14th, 2011 | Tags: , , , | No Comments

« Older Entries