on christmas day

Wishing you all--you hippies (in space and elsewhere), you greenies, you eco-warriors, you writers, you readers, you skimmers, you casual perusers, you--a Merry Christmas, and a fantastic holiday season.

How can it not be? There's Doctor Who on! To the TARDIS!

(Image borrowed from here.)

on giftwrap

It didn't occur to me until earlier this week as I realized I still hadn't wrapped my Christmas gifts that most of the giftwrap options open to me weren't green ones. I headed to my local organic shop, and did discover some lovely (although not particularly Christmas-y) 100% recycled wrapping paper made with soy-based ink. However, it was also £1.49 a sheet, and the sheets weren't terribly big. Due to my very tiny budget, I ended up with giftwrap from WH Smith. However, this got me thinking about eco wrapping paper, as well as other more eco-friendly options for dressing up your gifts.

At Pristine Planet there are a number of options for handmade giftwrap using non-toxic dyes, post-consumer waste, shed tree bark, and other lovely things. A quick Google search will give you a number of options, however, you will most likely have to order them online. The non-eco stuff is what is cheap to stock, and unfortunately that's what you're most likely to find in Hallmark, WH Smith, and other chain stores.

If you want to take a more hands-on approach and forgo store-bought wrapping paper, you can create your own eco giftwrap. Green Planet Ethics gives some options such as using cloth, children's artwork (although, if you don't have kids, you can do it yourself to get a similar look. Finger painting, stamps made out of halved potatoes--use non-toxic paint and that's a well spent afternoon), magazine and newspaper pages, and even things like pinecones and holly in place of bows. Planet Forward has even more alternatives in place of store-bought products.

Next year, I plan to be more eco-friendly in my Christmas preparations. Instead of just getting a roll of store-bought paper and gift tags that only look homemade, I'll make my own. This way, I can also personalize each gift--write a message, decorate the wrapping using images I know that person likes. So much of Christmas is becoming just about gifts--about objects--placing less importance or full-on ignoring the reason why we give gifts in the first place: to make people happy. To let our friends and family know that we think about them, and love them, and miss them, and that while what we present them with is only a pale representation of what they mean to us, it is something that will let them know that there is someone who cares about them whenever they use or see their gift. Why can't the giftwrap do the same? Why does it have to be something to look at for a microsecond and then toss in the trash?

Personally, I think it can be a bit more.

(Image borrowed from here.)

on definitions

Years ago, during my daily wanderings round the internet, I came across a quote on someone's profile on some site I don't remember.

Author's write to live, writers live to write.

It's one of those anonymous quotes, one of many that flit about the profile pages of fledgling writers like flies, and are just as inconsequential. But for some reason, I started thinking about this one again. It's made me wonder about the difference between a writer and an author, and if there is really a difference at all.

The Oxford English Dictionary (online edition), says an author is "a writer of a book, article, or document; someone who writes books as a profession". A writer, on the other hand, is "a person who has written something or who writes in a particular way; a person who writes books, stories, or articles as a job or occupation". Very similar definitions are given for each word, however, there are minute differences. An author is a writer, implying that being an author is in a category above being a writer. It's something you can achieve--a title--like being called "doctor". An author is also someone who writes "book[s], article[s], or document[s]", all of which at first glance imply that an author is someone who writes prose. There can be books of poetry, yes, but articles and documents written in poetry? Difficult (although there is probably someone out there who has done it). People who write poetry also have their own title separate from author: poet. But similar can be said for them: when is one a poet, and when is one just someone who writes poetry?

An author is "someone who writes books as a profession". This enforces the idea purported in my anonymous quote: an author is a job description. What do you want to be when you grow up? A doctor, a lawyer, a pianist, an author. It's what you put on your CV, what you tell people at parties when they ask what you do. Furthermore, it's what you call yourself when you make money off of your writing, particularly in "book, article, or document" form. Only on the publication of one of those can one be called an author. This, of course, means that publishing short stories does not make you an author. A collection, possibly ("book" is, after all, a fairly broad term when you think about it), but a single story in a literary journal? According to this definition, no.

A writer, on the other hand, is "a person who has written something". That can apply to anyone. Every elementary school child is forced to produce a short story at some point in order to approve their apptitude with the written word. Does that, then, make everyone a writer? Is anyone capable of scrawling even the crudest short story able to claim that they are a writer? A writer is also someone "who writes in a particular way". Well, that is a bit better. A writer is someone who writes, yes, but also somoeone who writes in a way that distinguishes themselves from others. The use of the word "particular" implies a certain cultivation, that they way a writer writes is something they have crafted over time, something they do purposefully. This further separates the writer from the everyman (as the first part of the quotation implies), to someone specific--somoeone singular. Not everyone is a writer, just like not everyone is an actor or an artist or a musician. You may have acted in a play or painted a picture or were forced to learn the trombone, but that doesn't mean you are masters of those crafts.

And that's what a writer has: mastery.

A writer is "a person who writes books, stories, or articles as a job or occupation". Much like with "author", "writer" can also be given as a job description. In this instance, however, "document" has been replaced with "stories", which tells us that while you can write stories, you cannot author them, and while you can author documents, you cannot write them. Perhaps I'm delving in a bit too deep. These are, after all, just dictionary definitions. But how we define things is often how they are percieved. If you don't know what something is--what a word means--you look it up in a dictionary, and what you are told influences how you view that thing. Here, the dictionary is telling us that the difference between being an author and being a writer depends upon what you choose to write. However, both are professions. Both are occupations you can be paid for. In that, there is no difference.

I have always written. At first, it was scribblings on sheets of scrap paper that hardly resembled words at all, but which I called a story. Writing was a state of being. I wrote. It came as naturally to me as eating or sleeping or breathing, and was never something I gave conscious thought to. It wasn't until I was eleven that it occured to me that people make a living out of their writing. That it was a job. That when asked what you wanted to be when you grew up, you didn't have to say you wanted to be a vet, because you didn't know and that's what your best friend had said. You could be an author, and an author is something you are only when you achieve publication.

In university, as I finished my master's degree, one of my professors told us that upon completion, we were writers. Few of us were published in any medium, but we'd spent an entire year doing nothing but writing, so it was a fitting title. But it still made me wonder: when am I an author? Do I have to have a contract with Random House to do so? And saying we were writers sounded so...silly. So little. I wasn't sure I liked it completely.

Author's write to live, writer's live to write.

An author is someone who is published. By that token, many people can call themselves authors. Madonna. Jimmy Buffet. Will Smith. Pamela Anderson. So many people published today are those who are doing it out of boredom, or as a cash-in on their celebrity, or because they feel the need to do everything regardless of their talent for it. So many people who can call themselves authors are hardly deserving of the title.

A writer is someone who writes. A writer is someone who writes down sentences on cocktail napkins and hotel notepads. A writer is someone who wakes up in the middle of the night and gets out of bed to grab a pen, to try and weave a story from the frayed threads of their dreams. A writer is someone with words tumbling through their head every day of their lives, who put them down not for the sake of making money, but for the sake of getting their story out into the world. A writer wants to share, wants to tell, wants to shape their world for the better through the language they use.

The more I think about it, the more proud I am to call myself a writer. It's a difficult life, often solitary and it sure isn't a cash cow. But if I didn't write...well, I don't think I would be able to do that in the first place. Not willingly. I may never be published, I may never get to hold the title of "author", but for all that it is so similar--and yet so different--I am proud of the title I have.

I am a writer. And I'm living my life writing.

(Image borrowed from here.)

on herbal remedies

In light of the entire UK having been gripped in what could only have been a global warming-induced deep freeze, and my own subsequent cold, I've decided to take some time to talk about herbal remedies. Not all of them, of course. There are whole books dedicated to the subject. What I'm going to talk about are the things I reach for every time I get a sniffle, and why I think they work better than more modern alternatives.

1. Echinacea--it's a pretty purple flower that looks rather like a daisy, and, to me at least, it's practically a cure-all. Two of the more common ways to take echinacea is either in capsule or liquid form (which you then put into tea or juice) for the relief of common cold symptoms and a host of other things. Whenever I start to feel a sore throat, or even just a little run down, I put some in a drink (1mL up to 3 times daily), and honest to god, it works. With this on hand, I've kicked colds in a week, which is pretty good considering my flatmate was still expelling all of his symptoms after a month.

2. Honey--like many holistic remedies, honey has been used for centuries, primarily as a topical antiseptic. You can put honey on cuts and scrapes and it kills the bacteria present just as well as Neosporen would, if not better. Because of its antibacterial and antiseptic properties, honey is also good on sore throats. Put a spoonful in your tea, or consume the spoonful on its own like cough medicine (with lemon juice if you like), and it will soothe your raw throat while killing the bacteria that is causing your discomfort. And hey, it tastes better than Buckley's.

3. Ginger--after a trip to Greece in June, I suffered from some, shall we say, stomach upset. In my quest for remedies, I tried both ginger and lemon tea, and candied ginger. Ginger is used for indegestion, nausea, and other unpleasent stomach ailments, although I recommend taking it in its tea form. It's the most palatable way I've found. The candied ginger was foul.

4. Peppermint--used for the same ailments as ginger, peppermint is not only infinitely tastier, but can also be applied topically for plant-induced skin irritations, to soothe tension headaches, and when put under the nose or on the chest can clear sinuses. Besides peppermint, another herb in the mint family--that I've recently discovered--that is good for stomach problems is Dittany of Crete. I picked some up while in Greece (and I won't lie, Harry Potter played a part in the decision), and while it's fabled to be an aphrodisiac, it's also told to be a cure-all, used for the aforementioned stomach problems, and as a topical polutice for wounds.

5. Rest--okay, so it's not an herb, but I can honestly say that one thing I don't think people do enough of when they are ill, is rest. Oh, they say they do, however, often times many rely on fast-acting modern medicines and a single night's good sleep. The world has become a place where everyone wants to be the first, be on top, and that means being able to do everything from paperwork and problem solving to eating and sleeping quickly. But when you're sick, quick just doesn't cut it, and I would not be surprised if the reason why many take so long to heal is because they're not taking any time at all. Therefore my primary recommendation is to take the day--or week--off, put your feet up, and drift in that lazy, self-indulgent place that is illness. Your body will thank you.

For more information on herbal remedies, go here.

(Image borrowed from here.)

on the saturday morning cartoon

Over on Facebook, there's the movement (if one could call it that) to raise awareness for child abuse by changing your profile picture to a picture of a cartoon from your childhood. Whether or not this will actually incite action towards child abuse aside, changing my picture got me to thinking about the Saturday Morning Cartoon, and the environment's place in it.

Or rather, the lack of it.


When I was a kid, Ted Turner came out with Captain Planet and the Planeteers, a series about the adeventures of five kids with power rings representing the different elements (wind, earth, fire, water, and heart (not an element, but...it's there)). At the behest of the goddess Gaia, they travel around fighting polluters, and when a problem seems beyond them, they combine the power in their rings to summon Captain Planet.

A few years ago, I watched a couple of epsiodes out of nostalgia, and have to admit, while the premise and message are fantastic, the dialogue is rather cringe-worthy and the plots are a tad cheesy. But like I said, the premise and message are brilliant. A kids show about the environment! What better way to ensure the health and safety of our planet than by pressing its importance on the impressionable minds of children. Children who will then encourage their parents to hold a similar mindview. I know the show affected me as a kid, and is most likely one of the core reasons why I am an environmentalist today.

With this in mind, I wondered if there were programs made since the early 1990s (Captain Planet's original run) that were about the environment. Google tells me no.

Typing 'shows like Captain Planet', 'environmental cartoons' and 'environmental kids shows' into the search engine has come up with very little. Most are environmental political-style cartoons, however, I did come across an article about environmentalism in Disney cartoons. Said article from the Sunday Times states that many of Disney's movies carry environmental messages, backing up its claims with examples from the films. No offence to Mark Henderson, the writer of the article, but many of those examples are ones that will fly over a child's head like a jet fighter. Adults may pick up on it, but the chances of a child seeing Ariel falling in love with Prince Eric as "a fundamental division between humans and the natural world that can, at least partially, be overcome" is slim in the extreme. Any affect the films have on a child regarding the environment will only be subconscious, until such time as the child has grown and viewed the films through educated, adult eyes.

There are two films listed in the article, however, that I do agree that children would be able to pick up a message. Every kid is traumatised to varying degrees after seeing Bambi's mum get shot, and I wouldn't be surprised if the film was the reason why some people never took up hunting or ate venison (or meat in general) or why they later decided to work for the World Wildlife Fund. Finding Nemo is another Disney film whose environmental message is overt enough for children to pick up on it. From the scene of Nemo being torn from his father when he's captured by humans, to the varying psychologically upsetting states of the fish in the dentist's tank, the film does clearly demonstrate the damaging affect taking animals out of the wild for pets can have on them.

"The reaction to the film by the general public has led to environmental devastation for the clown fish and has provoked an outcry from several environmental protection agencies, including Marine Aquarium Council, Australia. Apparently the demand for tropical fish skyrocketed after the film's release. This has caused reef species decimation in Vanuatu and many other reef areas.

Even more bizarre, after seeing the film, some aquarium owners released their pets into the ocean, but the wrong ocean. This has introduced species harmful to the indigenous environment and is harming reefs worldwide as well."

...or maybe not.

But these are films, not half-hour cartoons kids can watch while they eat their cereal in their pyjamas. Granted, it's been a while since I watched a Saturday Morning Cartoon. Environmentalism could very well be present in some of the shows on YTV and Cartoon Network and CBeebies. But as far as overt, clear-cut, in-your-face environmental cartoons for kids goes...

It looks like Captain Planet is our hero.

on graduating

Today, I graduated with a Master of Letters (with Merit) in Creative Writing.

I was an exhausting, beautiful, fantastic day.

There was snow covering the turrets of the main building and dusting the grass in the quadrangles. Coloured light poured through the stained glass into the hall and everyone was more than a little cold. We were nervous. We were exited. We sang in Latin and tried not to trip and shook hands and got our degrees. We stood in the cold taking photos and drinking the free alcohol (to celebrate and keep warm), and almost didn't want to leave. Snow crunched under our shoes and bit into the legs laid bare by short skirt hems, but we didn't want it to be over; didn't want to take off our gowns and hoods and not be set apart. But we did. We shed our robes like snakeskin, leaving studenthood in the seams; picked up our qualifications and marched out, onto the streets, into the traffic, shivering with pride and happiness and latent fear. For some, this was just a step--a necessity before doctorates and teaching and more letters after their name. For others, this was the end. No more classes. No more tests. No more essays.

It was over.

But we're still not done.

on diaries

As the year is slowly winding to a close, it occurred to me this week that I would need a 2011 diary. I am a big fan of list making, and writing things down in pen or pencil, and so I enjoy picking a new diary out every year. Last year, I bought a Paperblanks, and as I enjoyed using it, I figured I'd purcahse another diary, only in a slightly larger size than before (their Slim format can be a bit finickyto write in, especially as you get closer to the middle of the book while writing on the left side). Thus prepared, I made my way to my university bookshop, firm in my decision.

When I got there, I wavered.

As I stood in the shop, twirling the book stand round and round, I discovered that my eye was drawn elsewhere. They were slim diaries, black and bound with a cloth elastic. They were beautiful in their simplicity, as classic as the little black dress. You could see them older, the cover cracked and creased, the pages wrinkled from wear, but that only added to their beauty.

They were Moleskines.

I'd seen them before, in Waterstones and a dozen other shops, almost forgettable sitting near flashy book covers and notebooks covered with cupcakes and confetti and cats. I'd always ignored them, eyeing the pricetag and turning up my nose. Why would I pay so much for something so simple? But standing in the bookshop, something drew me to them. Something made me want to own them.

As with all new purchases, I had to deliberate. So I went home. That evening, I looked on the Moleskine website, practically drooling as I beheld not just the diaries, but the notebooks and sketchbooks and watercolour books; books big enough for scrapbooking; books small enough for only a single sentence. I love books in all their forms, and have often bought a new notebook when I knew it would be ages before I would be able to use it. There's just something about writing that first word--that first line--in a new book that is just...spine-tingling.

As I researched, I, like everyone in the 21st Century, turned to Wikipedia. For a while, all was well with the world.

Then I read the end of the article.

Then I felt my stomach clench.

Moleskines...are not green.

According to the article, in 2010 the California Prop 65 warning label started to be slapped onto their books. Save for their Cahier line (which is made from cardboard), all of Moleskine's covers are made with a plastic softener called DEHP (or Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate), which apparently is carcinogenic, and thus necessitated the Prop 65 label. DEHP is used in the manufactoring of products containing PVC, including medical equipment like blood bags and air tubes. Not only is DEHP carginogenic, but it also adversely affects the human reproductive system, as they can leech into the body, lowering sperm count, affecting male fetal development, and causing miscarrige (as it's a pseudo-estrogen and hormone modifier). The Wikipedia article on DEHP (as linked above) continues to outline the harm the chemical can do to the human body.

So why is it used in Moleskine notebooks?

Unfortunately, the internet has provided no answer. Moleskine is aware that the chemical is used in their products, and of the harm that it could cause, but as of August 2010 has done nothing about it. Sickened--and disappointed--I decided not to buy a Moleskine. However, that did not stop me from staring morosely at them when I was in Waterstones a few days later. They looked so innocent. After all, they're just books. Empty books with false leather casing. Could it really be so damaging to own one?

I touched one, and when I got home couldn't stop myself from washing my hands.

I have since begun a search into other, chemical-free notebooks and diaries. Quo Vadis has an eco line that uses 100% recycled paper, and is even manufactured using biogas energy (although they are difficult to find in the UK). Collins has a carbon neutral notebook collection, an Eco line of diaries, and appears to regularly use 100% recycled paper in their products. Hopefully, I'll discover others, and as time passes more companies--including Moleskine--with strive to use fewer production methods that harm both people and the planet.

But for now, I think I'm going to stick with Paperblanks. First instinct is always the best, right?

(Image borrowed from here.)

on studio ghibli

Lately, I've been on a bit of an anime binge. More specifically, a Studio Ghibli binge.

I've been a Studio Ghibli fan for years, the appreciation--and later admiration--first beginning at age thirteen when I first saw Princess Mononoke. I was awed by the film. The story telling was captivating, the animation beautiful, and the score moving. I was entranced, and ten years later, I still am.


The film centres around Ashitaka, a man living during Japan's Muromachi period, who finds himself cursed by a dying boar demon. He leaves his home village for the boar's homeland, hoping to find a way to lift the curse and prevent his death. What he finds, however, is not a cure, but a struggle between the human village of Irontown and the gods, demons, and animals of the forest they threaten to destroy.

The film's environmental message is a powerful one, and one of the things about it that interests me is that there is no victory for either humanity or nature. While characters such as Lady Eboshi do change their former outlook (deciding to stop ravaging the forest to make iron), there are also ones like Jigo, who, despite almost dying at the hands of a deer god, still appears unrepentent towards his destructive actions. There are no winners and no losers, which is a great mirror of what actually happens in life, and one not often seen in any film, let alone an animated one.

One of the things writer and director Hayao Miyazaki does in this film that I adore, is his use of characterization as juxtaposition. There are two extremes in the film: those who hate humans (as encompassed by San, the titular princess), and those who hate nature (as encompassed by Lady Eboshi). In the middle, is Ashitaka, who represents a balance between the two. Of course, this is an extreme oversimplification of the characters. San may hate humans, but the only ones she knows having been trying to kill her animal friends and family, and as the story progresses she does come to care for Ashitaka. Lady Eboshi, who for the majority of the film only sees the forest and its animals, spirits, and gods as an obstacle in her path to bettering the industry of her village, is extremely generous to humans. She takes care of lepers, and frees prostitutes, and puts her trust in Ashitaka only hours after meeting him. Both women are complicated characters, and their status as polar opposites is not completely static. I find it fascinating how Miyazaki structures their motivation, and slowly and subtly changes them.

As an older, more overtly environmentally conscious writer, Miyazaki's use of nature in his films has been--and continues to be--a great inspiration to me. Princess Mononoke and his first Studio Ghibli film, Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind, are two of his more overtly environmentally conscious films. However, just because the environment isn't the central theme of the film does not mean he doesn't encorporate it elseware.

In Spirited Away, the protagonist Chihiro, working in a bath house for spirits, serves a massive, foul-smelling, filthy spirit that is nothing so much as sentient mud. During the spirit's bath, she discovers what at first she thinks is a thorn, but turns out to be the handle of a bicycle. Pulling out the bicycle results in dislodging a small mountain of human garbage, and once it's clear, Chihiro discovers that the spirit is actually a river god. It's a relatively small seen in the film, and the personification of the human pollution of the natural world goes uncommented on by any of the characters, however, it's things like that that have greatly influenced how I structure my own work.

To be honest, writing stories solely about global warming and melting ice caps can get rather dull. But Miyazaki has taught me that I can still have my environmental message present--that I can still say what I want to say about how I believe we should treat our planet better. It will just be done quietly. A sentence. A paragraph. A line of dialogue. It doesn't have to be big to make an impact, it just has to be there.

Next on my Studio Ghibli viewing list is Pom Poko, a film about tanuki (Japanese raccoon dogs). Written and directed by Isao Takahata, it also appears to have an environmental message, the plot centering around human development encroching on the natural habitat of animals. So I guess Miyazaki isn't the only environmental buff in the studio, eh?

my name is kate, and i am a writer

Blogs are everywhere. Everyone has one--or did before abandoning it for other pursuits, or a handle that isn't 'iheartvampires201'--and if you are one of the few who don't, there comes a point where someone asks, and gives you a funny look when you give your answer.

This goes doubly for anyone in a creative field.

Before the advent of the internet, fledgling writers grappled for spots in magazines and newspapers, in journals and 'zines, and when dissatisfied with their piles of rejection letters, created their own journals with which to slake their thirst for publication. Modern writers still do that, however, they have also turned to blogging, as an outlet for creativity, criticism, and passionate exultation of those whose work they admire the most.

I am now one of them.

After two degrees, and two queries by a published friend of my mother about whether or not I had a blog, I decided it was time to follow in the professional steps of so many others, and create a space purely for my numerous ruminations on not just my writing, but the writing of others, its place in the world, and the world's place in it.

I like the environment.

I like science fiction.

I like tea.

Chances are, they all wind up in the same story.