AlMoStNaNoWriMo

Have I mentioned that I totally failed NaNoWriMo 2009?  Yessir, in classic mattjosh fashion, I was quick to start, slow to finish.

Oh yes, I am a force in first gear, a gallop out of the gate, a booster during blast-off!

But as the time went on, and my life intruded into my writing schedule, I took my mid-month trip to Washington for my organization's national conference and endured long days, intense partying, and hard nights on various floors and beds in the circa-L'Enfant Plaza area.  I wrote on the planes, but could not recover my initial momentum once I arrived home in Albuquerque.

It didn't help that I launched into a project that had sat for two years, after a blitz of inspiration birthed and raised it in two days time into a bouncing baby step outline for a screenplay.  Now I was trying to adapt it into a novel as I went, dismayed constantly that I was not capturing the tone I had envisioned.

It's a difficult project.  A satire on Islamic Terrorism in middle America.  It has to be funny but not too funny, serious but not too serious, real but not too real.  My tone was alternately farcical and melancholic.  Maybe it will work.  Maybe, taken as a completed whole it will reek of genius, rather than simply reek.

Most importantly, I need to return to it because I won't be able to die easy without having completed it.  But there are a lot of those project sitting around my world, and maybe it's better to keep a few unfinished just so I don't get too comfortable with the notion of my own demise.

I'd like my last work to be an autobiography, its closing words, dictated because my hands have grown too feeble to type, quoting Polonius emerging from behind the curtain, "O! I am slain!"

The New Old-School Environmentalism

“Climate change data might have been cooked by the researchers at blah blah blah...”

That's about as far as I got into the story about East Anglia University recently.  This all happened just ahead of the Copenhagen climate thingy that's going on now. 

If I sound poorly informed, it's because I am.  Happily so.

Are we still talking about global warming?  Does anybody else see this for what it is?  The climate change issue is, at best, an erudite scientific debate that people are hoping will dictate environmental policy that ought to be based on common sense.  At worst, it's a political straw-man seized upon by the anti-environment lobby because they knew it would be a sticky mess and divert the dialogue from the real issue. 

There, I've just written what should be the key word in this debate twice.  Everyone ready for a big surprise?  Environment.  Not climate.

Everybody talks about climate change and global warming like if we could just all agree on that one way or the other, the problem will go away on its own through our collective prayer.  Don’t get me wrong.  It’s great that we finally have something on which to blame the weather, unbridled force of nature that it is.  But it doesn't matter that this July was hotter than usual, or that you remember it snowing more when you were a kid.  Weather is weird everywhere and it changes everywhere (except Southern California).

The real issue at stake is the health of our planet and its myriad species, be they cute, hideous, or just kinda-funny-lookin'.  The global warming apologists of the world want tighter industrial regulations, protections for threatened biomes, energy efficiency, less pollution, etc.  They want the exact things that environmentalists used to want simply because they were the right things to do.  Protect life, keep our air and water clean, and find sustainable ways to exist without destroying the planet. 

Sounds good, right?  Who can argue against that?  Some, maybe many, but not most.  But who can argue about scientific findings concerning an issue as big and as old as the planet itself?  Just about everybody.  Enter environmental opponents, erect straw man.

I'm not saying climate change doesn't matter.  It makes me sad that salamanders and joshua trees may become extinct.  But the solutions we've devised to combat global warming are the same as the solutions we have for general environmental destruction and pollution, so stick to the argument with the stronger evidence and get to work.  Don't waste time arguing the finer points of our demise when the tools are readily available to stop it.

Most importantly (for an English major anyway), it’s still acceptable semantics to say someone either “believes” or “does not believe” in global warming.  I believe that anything that is still commonly referred to as a “belief” should not dictate policy.

Doctor's Note

Please excuse this blogger's absence as of late. He has been trapped beneath a fruit vendor's cart at the corner of Wilshire and Plymouth, in front of the Washington Mutual. He returns to you dirty, but well fed.