When I was a child, my parents maintained a traditional row garden, so when I finally had a place of my own, I figured I would start a garden myself. When I started thinking about starting my own garden last fall, it resembled the garden I grew up with, albeit on a smaller scale. It would be approximately 8 ft x 12 ft will rows of beans, some tomatoes, peppers and squash, however as I started to investigate urban gardening, I began to see that there were so many more options available than I had anticipated. I didn’t have to dig into the existing soil or plant things in rows, in fact, many of my presumptions about gardening didn’t hold at all. In fact, I could even raise chickens in my own yard!
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves here. After reading through a few books on urban farming and countless websites, it seemed like the best way to start the transformation from typical suburban backyard to small urban homestead would be to setup a few raised beds using square foot gardening techniques. Using the instructions for Ana White’s $10 Cedar Raised Garden Beds as inspiration, I set out to build my own beds. I didn’t particularly have the means to rip the fence posts lengthwise so I modified the plans a bit to use some 2 x 2’s as corner supports as well as making each bed 3 ft wide. After a few hours of construction I ended up with the beds pictured below (the center bed is upside down).
When I went to sink these into the ground, I soon realized that the two foot long posts that I had put in each corner to stabilize the beds were much longer than they needed to be. In order to get around the many of the roots in the ground I ended shaving each of them down to only a few inches each, but I think it should be enough to hold it in place. To help them from moving around, the beds were screwed together on the ends.
The beds were filled with a Mel’s Mix composition. While I was able to get the peat moss and vermiculite without much issue, the bulk of my compost came from the city compost pile, which I think was mostly leaf compost, and perhaps not entirely finished. I’ll be starting a compost pile this year to amend the soil with additional nutrients, but I’ve resigned myself to at least testing it and possibly using some amendments if necessary.
I planted the garden a few weeks ago using the layout below. I know that there’s a few problems, namely that the corn plot isn’t large enough to pollinate naturally and that the tomato and corn plans share a common parasite so I’ll need to watch out for that.
Here are my beds shortly after being planted, there’s some fencing around the beds to prevent the dogs from getting too curious.
Shortly after planting we had a couple of weeks of cold temperatures and rain, so I think things are a bit stunted, however I’m positive about the outlook. Some other notes of interest:
I conducted the soil test this past weekend, it showed up with a pH between 7 and 8, low nitrogen, low potassium, and high potash. Over the next few weeks I’ll add a soil acidifier and some NP fertilizer to bring things to where they ought to be.
I’ve been seeing gnats around my cucumber seedlings in the morning. Given the amount of rain that we’ve received and the source of my compost, I believe that these are fungal gnats. I’ve setup some apple cider vinegar traps, so hopefully that should address the problem, if not it seems mosquito dunks might be the another possible solution.
The asparagus was planted before the grid went down and it appears that some of them were misplaced into the corn squares. I’m not sure if I should try moving them or let them be for this year.
There is a great place to get compost in the St. Louis area. It is called St. Louis Composting. There are several locations. You might want to check out the website. I have gotten compost there for my squarefoot boxes. You wouldn’t need to buy five different kinds as this is made from different types of composted materials already.
@Anthony The varieties of tomatoes that I planted are indeterminate (vining). As long as I keep the number of vines to a minimum and provide a trellis for support, they should do fine within a square foot. If they were bush varieties they would need closer to the 4-9 sq ft you mentioned.
It,s hard to tell by the pictures But, could your tomatoe plants be too close together? Minimally, they should be 30 in. apart. Ideally 36in.
Looks great and you are off to a great start with your raised beds. Good Luck. Been gardening for 45 years.
This cake creation happened about on Tuesday night at about 11:00 pm when Jordan and I started craving something sweet and unhealthy...I don't keep a lot of sweets in the pantry because let me be honest, I'm a meat and potato type girl. It's pretty rare that I get the hankering for something this sinfully sweet. Okay, so it was 11:00 pm and eventhough my craving for sleep was a lot greater than my craving for dessert, Jordan insisted that we raid the pantry and create something out of what we could find. This is what we found:
Jordan suggested that we melt the chocolate to make a topping for the cake since we didn't have any icing. So while I made the cake Jordan unwrapped the caramel filled kisses and crushed the pecans...then he preceeded to tell me that he was sleepy and I found him lying in the bed with Josiah...just like a man! Of course, I told him to get his booty out of the bed since he was the one who started this whole cake creation anyway, to which he replied, "I'm not sleeping...just laying here with my buddy."............sure..............back to the cake....
So after the cake was done cooking and cooling, I melted the semi-sweet morsels and kisses on the stovetop using the double-boiler method by placing a bowl filled with the chocolate inside of a pot filled with water....then Jordan showed back up (just in time) to suggest that we go ahead and cut the cake into squares so that the chocolate topping would seep into the cake like a sponge. I have to say that this was a great idea! (If you have had Chili's Chocolate Molten Cake then you know what I'm talking about!) So we cut the cake into squares, poured the topping over the cake, and sprinkled the crushed pecans on top. This is what a cut piece looked like:
﻿And yes, it really was as good as it looks...I just wish that we would have had some Bluebell Vanilla Icecream to go with it......
Our Addy Jo is now 18 months old! Let me rephrase that: My baby is now 18 months old! There is so much to say about her complex personality but if I had to sum it up, I would say this: She can be completely serious one minute and a total goofball the next. People comment on her serious disposition but they rarely see her crazy side. It's like night and day difference!
I am completely blown away by her intelligence level. At 18 months she is saying quite a few words, some of which are: mama, daddy, siah (Josiah), bubba (Eli), Ah-Jo (Addy Jo), cheese, teetee, poopoo, button, bite bite, juice, puppy, ball, shoe, bath, phone, bye, Mickey, George, this, that, okay, tay u (thank you), milk, night night, baby, paw paw, no
She answers our questions with a nod for yes and a flat out "no" for no. I love asking her questions like this and watching her understanding right before me eyes:
Addy Jo chimes right in with her own version of gibberish. She has the sweetest little singing voice.
Blueberries, grapes, bananas, sweet peas, baby bell peppers, trail mix, dried cranberries, raisins, bean dip, pinto beans, kidney beans, peanut butter, m&ms and practically anything with chocolate
Addy Jo loves clothes and "helping" me fold laundry. She also likes to climb, play outside, and ride in her stroller while I run. She LOVES baby dolls and puppies. She likes to watch Mickey Mouse Clubhouse and Curious George. She has two Mickey Mouse shirts that she wants to wear constantly. Coloring(scribbling) is one of her favorite things to do.
Addy Jo has brown hair that looks reddish in the sun. She has unruly curls in the back that mommy doesn't know what to do with! She also has 12 teeth and she weighs 27 pounds.
Today you turned 6 years old! I don't know if my mommy heart can take you turning 6 and starting kindergarten in the same week. As bittersweet as it is to see you growing so fast, it also fills me with great joy to see the little boy that God is shaping you to be. You are sweet, caring and sensitive. You are smart and observant...you seem to notice the little details that go unnoticed to those around you.
Last night at bedtime, I read you your favorite books at the moment....Lets Imagine at the Zoo and Dinosaurs Galore. You know all the names of just about every animal and every dinosaur. When I pointed out a bird, you said, "no, its a hawk!"
As I listened to you pray and sing after we read, my heart was filled with even more joy. And as you drifted off to sleep, I realized that at that exact time, six years ago, I was about 4 hours away from giving birth to you. Those were the scariest hours of my life as we came so close to losing you. But God had a wonderful plan for you and He filled your lungs with air and bestowed on me and your daddy mercy, grace, love and joy!
I am so thankful that God saw fit to make me your mommy 6+ years ago. I can't imagine what I would do without my 'Siah. You fill me with so much joy!
As I recall your smile as you headed off to kindergarten this morning with cupcakes for your class, I smile too. I love you so much Josiah. Happy 6th Birthday!
My name is Lilian. i saw your profile here(mytinyphone.com) today and became int rested in you,i will also like to know you the more and establish a relationship that is based on truth and trust with you i want you to send an email to my email address so i can give you my picture for you to know whom i am.Here is my email address (liliankarume35@yahoo.com)
You may not be aware, but I am a Close to my Heart Independent Consultant. A little over a year ago I discovered their products and fell in LOVE. I would love to share them with you too! I am only a little way from my goal and with these great special offers, now is a fabulous time to stock up on Close to my Heart!
Whoo's Your Valentine Kit offer is ending Jan 31st. This super cute kit and absolutely adorable stamp set! The kit is only $10 with a small $35 purchase. But hurry! This kit is gone Jan 31st forever!
The January stamp of the month is also only available through January 31st. Spend $50 in product and your get this stamp set for only $5! And yes, a $50 order gets the $5 stamp of the month AND Whoo's your Valentine for $10! Wahoo!!!!
The Fall/Winter Idea Book products are running low and ending soon too! Jan 31st is the last day to place orders. Don't delay, once these products are gone, they are GONE. It took me awhile to grasp how dedicated they are to their deadlines, so sitting on the fence doesn;t work for too long! LOL Learned THAT lesson the hard way!
Tours can be catered to focus on a particular city or a broader scope of the region. Charter tours are separate from our scheduled tours, as they are crafted individually to match the needs of each group. Bring a group out and experience the green scene together!
Find unique wedding services in Woodland, California. Local vendors provide everything from financial planning to travel arrangements.
Botte piccola fa vino buono A small cask makes a good wine Keg packaging eliminates bottle shock and glass recycling, reduces labor costs, and minimizes the wine wastage involved with corked bottles and old wine.
From Pantone's Rose Quartz and Serenity to high collar necklines and lightweight denim, there are certainly a few trends I'm eager to try in the office next season.
I have particularly fallen for the intricate embroidery found in the Victoriana blouse stepping away from the classic white shirt.
From a pantomime to Christmas lunch and Secret Santa, festive nails are a great addition to a mother-approved outfit or your novelty Christmas jumper.
I recently had the pleasure of visiting Sophie, Beauty Therapist and Owner of Cache Spa in Tarporley, Cheshire. Sophie offers a range of treatments including Jessica GELeration for which I chose to create 'Festive Nails'.
On the left hand, I opted for an almost holographic effect. To achieve this, Sophie applied a coat of ‘Sterling Queen’ then rubbed 'Diamond Glitter' on to each nail and finished with a coat of ‘Wedding Band’.
On the right hand, I selected a gold glitter effect using a coat of ‘Palladium’ followed by 'Rose Gold' glitter rubbed on to each nail and finally, a coat of 'Golden Goddess'.
The manicure included a lovely massage with Jessica's Hand and Body Emulsion and overall, lasted an hour.
Jessica GELeration provides impeccable nails lasting up to one month whilst protecting your natural nails.
Cache Spa will officially open next month and I am already looking forward to my next treatment. A big thank you to Sophie, Cache Spa for the invitation and I hope you all have a lovely Christmas.
In need of some last-minute gift inspiration for him? I've got you covered from ski accessories to luxe-looking products all under £55.
So last week I wrote one post. And it was all about how Gene Roddenberry was a big d-bag. At the time, I was already stressed out with a lot of general life stuff. Not getting to do my Shakespeare camp this summer, not getting to go home and spend time with my family, dealing with injuries and illness, worrying about regular grown-up human things, now working on two big projects and then having to cancel a trip home at the last minute really got to me and writing that post just pushed me over the edge.
I suddenly felt like I couldn't write. I couldn't blog. I couldn't paint. I couldn't work on anything.
I wanted to retreat into a cozy hole in the Shire and read The Hobbit and eat scones and sleep until all this stuff was over. Just let the storm pass.
But the storm won't pass. I'm at the eye of the hurricane. I made this storm and, wherever I go, I take it with me. It won't stop until I make it stop.
So, over the last few days, I sat down with some bribe cookies and tea and made myself work. I pushed through the big problem I was having in one manuscript. I worked many, many hours trying to nail down the art for another one and I've just about got it. I can move on with these things now. Last night I went to bed in the knowledge that the storm had lessened.
This morning though, I was still upset about the blog, Star Trek, and the whole "Roddenberry was a d-bag" thing. I'd always known that he wasn't great to be around but I intentionally shied away from the gory details. Reading the interview with Gerrold, and then having to really think about it as I wrote a post, I couldn't get away from it anymore.
And, after a couple of days, I realized that all this stuff had sort of hurt my enthusiasm for this blog and, maybe more disturbingly, for Star Trek.
I realized at the beginning of this project that I didn't want to do something that condemned or harshly criticized or snarkily made fun of something I've always loved so much. I wanted this project to be about optimism and the love of something. About focusing on the good that Trek brought into my life, the way it has been my third parent, my therapy, my solace on a bad day.
I logged into Blogger this morning for the first time in a week and found a comment from a reader who'd read the awful details about Roddenberry's behavior and said, "I couldn't let it hurt my love of Trek."
So I guess that's it. It's really a choice. I can choose whether or not the knowledge of Roddenberry's issues affect my love of the show. Star Trek may have been created by Roddenberry but Roddenberry wasn't Star Trek. His personality may have dictated a lot of what went on backstage and what made it onto the screen but even he couldn't get in the way of a good, meaningful story. And, like I said in the previous post, TV is a collaborative business. A whole lot of hands went into making Trek and thanks to that "many cooks" approach, Star Trek was a show that portrayed an optimistic future and a group of people all trying as hard as they can to do the right thing.
Sometimes it falls short. LGBT characters are painfully absent. Female characters are often victims rather than capable crewmen. Sometimes people turn into salamanders and leave their miraculous offspring on some podunk planet in the Delta Quadrant.
What I'm saying is, Star Trek is not always perfect. Its creator certainly wasn't. But, I can still love it. I can still cherish what it has given me. I can still carry on with this project, knowing that one man couldn't make or break the greatness that was Trek.
Over the last day or so a few readers and friends on Facebook pointed me to this article on Blastr about how awful it was to work with Gene Roddenberry--the fact that he had a substance abuse problem and that he often deferred to his lawyer about important story matters on TNG, etc. The full interview, however, from TrekMovie is a much better, fuller read.
When I first saw the Blastr article popping up in my feed, I didn't even read it. Still, I somehow knew from the title, "Star Trek Writer Reveals Ugly Side of Working with Roddenberry on the Sci-Fi Classic" that the writer in question was most likely David Gerrold. I saw Gerrold speak last year at Star Trek: Vegas and he's a really candid, interesting, intelligent dude. He's always been very outspoken about what it was like to work on Trek and his opinions about the different courses the show has taken over the years etc. So, it didn't surprise me at all to open up the article and see that it was Gerrold who was speaking out about Roddenberry's issues.
Everyone is human--even the guy who invented Spock--and unfortunately it turns out that Gene wasn't so much a great guy to work for as he had a great idea for a show and then was dogged enough about pursuing it to actually get it on the air and make it exist for everyone. But... was he great to be around? No.
The thing about writers (and a lot of creative types, really) is that they're often awful people. I would have wanted to smack Charles Dickens every time I looked at that guy if I'd known him or been married to him or if I was his shoeshine boy or whatever other Victorian nonsense he got up to. It's the same with a lot of my favorite writers (and here's a great article about why) But I love Dickens' novels. His work gives the impression of a man thoughtful and gentle, caring more about others than himself but, in his private life, he apparently couldn't help being a complete ass. The thing is, authors get to be assholes in the privacy of their own home. Like me. I work for myself. The only people who have to listen to me whine and complain and act like a crazy person are my husband and Bunny. But--TV is a collaborative business. And, beyond collaborative, it's public.
As an author/artist, I write a book or a story. I give it to the editor at my press or the editor at a lit mag. They have some notes. I make them or I don't. I give it back. They publish it or they don't. A handful of people read it. Occasionally someone will write to me and say they like what I've written and my day will be better for it.
In TV, you work in a room full of people and hand that work off to other people who then hand it off to yet more people who then make it into an episode of TV with a bunch of other people. Your script passes through a ton of hands by the time its made. And everyone has opinions and input. Then, its aired and potentially millions of people will watch it on that first airing alone. Reviews are written. Folks write letters. Etc etc. The point is, there are about a hundred cooks in a very small kitchen and everyone's trying to make the same dish but they're not all using the same recipe. We, the audience, get the final product--presented to us by a single chef, for good or bad, as if he were the only one behind the kitchen doors.
In the midst of it all, for someone like Gene, you're operating from a place of fear and, as Picard says in Devil's Due, "Fear can be a powerful motivator." As the creator and show-runner, all of TNG's failings and successes were placed on his shoulders. Star Trek had already been cancelled once and Roddenberry'd had his baby taken away. Now, they were giving it back to him. Things seemed to be going well but my understanding about the resurgence of Trek is that TNG was always in danger of being cancelled again--until about the fourth season. After Roddenberry was already knocking on death's door and had apparently, for the most part, taken leave of the show.
Does the fear, the drugs, the deferring to ridiculous lawyers or whoever else Roddenberry was listening to make his actions toward Gerrold and the other Trek writers right? No. Absolutely not. Roddenberry was the captain of the Trek ship and, in many ways, he failed his crew. He wasn't living up to the standards he wished his fictional captain to portray on screen. Picard would never ignore the most basic needs or most important thoughts of his crew. But the guy behind Picard did. Jean Luc Picard is stalwart, even-tempered, and righteous--always standing up for what's right. Maybe the character was aspirational for Roddenberry. The portrait of a man he couldn't be.
As for Gerrold, he went on to do lots of other lovely things. And now, like me (only successful) he writes books. His editor or publisher have opinions but Gerrold has the final say. He's the only cook in his kitchen and I get that. He's given himself the power to operate without fear. He's won Nebula and Hugo awards. I get it. I get wanting the freedom to write whatever fearless idea you come up with. I just wish that kind of fearlessness hadn't come up against such heavy opposition. Star Trek was always supposed to be a show about fearlessly breaking boundaries, exposing injustices, and doing the right thing even when it's the hard thing. It's too bad that, behind the scenes, it was much the opposite.
This article has brought out a lot of talk about how Roddenberry's vision for new Trek made the show boring. I'll address this, and Gerrold's depressingly never-shot episode "Blood and Fire" in another post later this week. Also soon to come: The Trek/Bechdel Test #3.
Alright so, just in case you're new to this series. I'm looking at the results of Trekkie Feminist's Star Trek Bechdel test and attempting to explore what it is that sets Voyager apart from the other series. This is the first post in that exploration.
I've been planning on writing a post about the terrible boyfriends of Trek for some time. After an entire year of Star Trek, I was a little overwhelmed and, for a while didn't have it in me to get to this post, but the idea kept popping into my head. Why is it that so many of the female-centric episodes of every Trek (except Voyager) involve a terrible boyfriend, potential boyfriend, or ex putting them in danger?
It's a problem that's been going on as far back as The Original Series. Aside from Kirk being everyone's ultimate bad boyfriend, we get an actual Bad Boyfriend episode and it's called: "What Are Little Girls Made Of?" In this one, Christine Chapel suddenly hears from her long-lost fiancé and goes down to the planet he's inhabiting along with Kirk. Lots of naked crazyness ensues and Chapel realizes this dude is a total creep.
But does it pass the Bechdel Test? It would if Chapel/Andrea had talked about something besides dudes.
This episode sets a precedent that would be followed pretty extensively in TNG, then to a lesser extent in DS9, not so much in Voyager, and then brought back "Deanna Style" in ENT.
Now, that's not to say that dudes don't also get relationship episodes. In fact, on this very day, 48 years ago, McCoy realized he was dating a dangerous creep when she turned into a salt monster and tried to eat him. The issue here is that, when a guy in Starfleet gets a girlfriend, he isn't usually the one who's ultimately in peril. But, when a female officer dates a guy, he usually ends up being a cad and she's either put in danger of some kind or forced to act out of character.
1- Deanna's terrible secret fiance, Wyatt. Actually this guy isn't awful or dangerous. He's just some guy in a turtleneck who she was engaged to when she was a little girl. That's not weird. Nope.
2-Alien Entity. This also isn't that awful except that he KNOCKS HER UP without her permission. She ends up with a beautiful little boy who she loves and then has to give back to the universe. I mean, what even?
4- Jev, the telepath. Jev and Deanna basically flirt and then, when she leaves his company and goes to bed, he enters her mind without consent and, in her dream state, proceeds to force himself on her in the form of her actual on-again/off-again BF, Riker. She falls into a dangerous coma.
5- Aaron Conor. This guy isn't so bad. He's just dedicated to his perfect colony and doing his job and, in the end, he's as affected by this brief romance as Troi is. Troi clearly has a specific taste in boyfriends though, right?
6-Ves Alkar. Super creep. He basically hooks up with Troi and then starts sucking away her life force to power his own. Troi almost dies, again. She falls into a coma, again.
Alright and then there's Riker and Worf. (Just FYI: I really shipped Worf/Deanna back in the day but I thought Worf/Jadzia ultimately made a better pair.) She ends up with Riker and they finally get hitched and you'd think she'd be done with terrible boyfriends who physically/mentally/telepathically assault her. But, no. There's Star Trek: Nemesis so...
7- Shinzon. Ok, this isn't a boyfriend. It's a legit attack by a dangerous, hostile stranger and it's absolutely horrifying. The fact that Shinzon (as Ves Alkar did during the series) appears to her first as Riker, makes it even more disturbing. This is everything that's wrong with the Troi=Victim problem in Star Trek.
It's worth noting that Beverly also had a couple of ill-fated flings. She dated her grandma's creepy life-suck boyfriend. She got way into Riker when he took a Trill symbiont but then couldn't hang when a woman took the same symbiont. Ultimately, though, she was always into Picard above all others. And, let's face it, he's a pretty good catch.
In DS9, Jadzia Dax almost makes a couple of questionable, life-altering decisions because she goes all doe-eyed over a one-episode boyfriend/girlfriend. This happens in Meridian and Rejoined. In spite of the way this gets on my nerves, I still feel that Rejoined was a pretty progressive episode.
Kira has a one-episode fling with Thomas Riker wherein he hijacks the Defiant and then gets captured by Cardassians. She has a weird almost-flirtation/almost-combative relationship with Gul Dukat but she always stands her ground. Otherwise, her most icky relationship is with Vedek Bareil. Though, I have to admit, I think it's just me that's creeped out by this guy. Unless it's not. Is anyone else creeped out by him?
Also in DS9, they turn this trope around in the episode, "The Muse," wherein Jake gets all messed up by his creative-energy-sucking girlfriend.
Alright, Janeway is basically married to the ship and, thus, doesn't have much chance for human-style romance. She gives it a brief shot with Chakotay in "Resolutions" who, honestly, probably would've been an amazing abandoned planet husband. That guy made her a bathtub. She has a flirtation with Prince Humperdink of the Delta quadrant but, after a battle of wits, its Janeway who has the upper hand.
She also makes herself a holodeck boyfriend and, again, it's Janeway who holds all the power. She even feels guilty for altering him to better fit her own personality. Oh, and she also gets it on with Tom Paris when they're both Salamanders but I'm not sure that counts because, you know, reasons.
B'Elanna is pretty much in it to win it with Tom Paris the entire series. Though they have their ups and downs, their relationship is basically steady and they provide one another with a realistic, safe, deeply felt love.
Kes shows up with Neelix but she sort of calls it off between seasons. This isn't a bad thing. As much as I love Neelix, he was a Bad Boyfriend. He was jealous, over-bearing, over-protective, and patronizing toward Kes. Once they broke up, they both became better characters.
Later, she has a one-episode flirtation with a guy named Zahir but he actually turns out to be a decent guy--instead her BFF, The Doctor, tries to kill her. Does this count as a Bad Boyfriend episode? I'm not sure. I'm leaning toward yes.
Seven of Nine. Ok, so Seven of Nine has a couple of romantic interests during the show, including one which took place solely in Unimatrix Zero. Harry Kim and The Doctor both had feelings for her but the feelings weren't mutual and the friendships didn't turn into romance in either case. At one point, The Doctor inhabits her body and does some flirting but this doesn't go anywhere. In the end, she somehow ends up with Chakotay, which, I mean, if you love hand-built bathtubs, it seems like you're doing pretty well.
I'll be honest with you, I've been up since five o'clock this morning and I've already been working on this post for two hours somehow and I'm getting really exhausted. I mean, seriously, I just forgot how to go "back" on Firefox so I'll try to keep the rest of this short :
Aside from T'Pol's main squeeze, Tucker, she has a brief encounter with a radical Vulcan. I'm not sure whether this counts as a boyfriend but it's definitely an "encounter" and this guy ends up violating her and leaving her with an (apparently) incurable (and tabooed) disease.
Anyway, both of these episodes feel like they could've just been re-written with Deanna Troi's name all over them following this simple pattern:
Here is an intelligent, capable officer of Starfleet who just happens to be female. She hooks up with a guy or flirts with a guy or just happens to be in the same quadrant of space with a guy and he ends up endangering her in some way and her plight becomes the focus of the episode. The plot revolves around this woman being a victim.
Aside from the whole Kes/Neelix weird relationship, which they got rid of pretty quickly, Voyager didn't seem to have these episodes. (And please correct me if you think of one or more Bad Boyfriend episodes) There were stories wherein B'Elanna, Seven, or Janeway were in danger but it wasn't typically because of a bad, one-episode relationship. And, moreover, most of the plots of Voyager's female-character-driven episodes weren't based on the old "woman in peril" device. It's like the difference in a knight and a damsel. The knight rides knowingly into danger to achieve some greater goal. The damsel screams her beautiful lungs out until someone rescues her.
In Voyager, the women are knights. Deanna Troi is a damsel in distress and usually her peril is at the hands of a man and, often, at the hands of a man she is romantically involved with.
Unfortunately, at least until Deanna Troi takes the Bridge Officer Test and gets a new suit of clothes, most of the Deanna-sodes were about her being a victim. Not about her figuring something out. Not about her solving the problem or working alongside her crewmembers to save someone else. They featured her in tears, in danger, or in a coma. And that's a pity. Eventually, they endowed her with more ability and responsibility but go back to that old, awful stand-by of the mind-rape in Star Trek: Nemesis.
So, I'm not entirely sure why they went in such a different direction with the female-led episodes in Voyager. Was it that having a female captain lead to different story lines? Was it part of the zeitgeist? Was it just a steady progression from TNG to DS9 to Voyager wherein everyone involved grew steadily more conscious of the role of women in their show? Were people asking the question, "What are little girls made of?" and getting new answers?
Just so you know, I'm working on that next Bechdel-related post. I've been watching other episodes of TNG and DS9 and I should have the next couple of posts up this week! Hooray!
In other news, I've FINALLY just about beat this sinus/respiratory infection. After a double course of antibiotics, a new allergy medicine, and a bottle of ibuprofen, I think I'm mostly free of this beast. No fever for a few days and I actually managed to get back in the gym yesterday and only overdid it a little bit.
(Quick shout out/thank you to my mom and Kate who sent me care packages! And everyone else who emailed to ask how I was! I feel so loved!)
Alright so this is basically a gritty, police procedural, which all takes place in a hugenormous space station floating in Earth's orbit. There's a lot of standard police procedural stuff going on here. A gripping, victim-focused teaser, a new, awkward partnership, a rookie and old hand, a cranky guy in charge. But, in just about every way, Johnson and Greenwood find ways surprise and subvert our expectations. I got the first issue free (and you can too!) and immediately bought the entire Digital Trade Paperback and read it in one sitting.
The dialogue is snappy, the pacing is quick, and the plotting is tight. You can tell immediately how much Sherlock Holmes, Miami Vice, and modern cop dramas Johnson has read/watched. You also get the sense, in the way Klem communicates with others in The Fuse and the way her background gradually surfaces, that this is a story that's been brewing in Johnston's head for a long time. The world inside The Fuse feels complete and he knows his way around it. Additionally, the flat, not-too-detailed art, with its cool, clean color scheme is perfect here and totally helps sell the whole cops on a big-ass space station idea.
Anyway, the first issue is free so go get it. And read it. And come back and tell me what you thought.
Guys, I am WAY into this book. I didn't even know this thing existed. I read Pride and Prejudice last year and thought maybe I'd try Emma or Mansfield Park next. But, I ran across a thing (probably a Wikipedia entry? Who even knows) that mentioned this book and I went right over to Amazon and got it on kindle (for free because it's literally 200 years old) and I'm ALMOST done. When I finish this post, that's what I'm doing--finishing Northanger Abbey.
So, basically, this is Jane Austen's satirical take on the Gothic Novel. I spent the first part of the year reading old, Gothic novels and I actually stopped because I just couldn't handle anymore creepy reflections in the window or maybe-haunted-cabinets/castles/moors or guys who just seriously hate every single thing ever and can't even handle it. Apparently Jane Austen went through a similar phase and wrote Northanger Abbey. All I'm doing is complaining about it in the middle of this blog entry so I feel pretty inferior right now. Anyway, she tackles spooky tropes the same way she tackled the novels of society--with a perfect balance between unflinching satire of the culture and real affection for her characters. If you're into Gothic fiction and Level 99 sarcasm, why not blend them into a delightful, hilarious literary adventure and devour it as I have.
One morning when I was hacking up all of my inside parts and Scott had gone off to the gym or a meeting or something (I wasn't paying attention because I was so gross and feverish) I had this weird desire to just watch some old Torchwood episodes. So, I started at the beginning and watched three (was it four?) straight through. Man, I missed this show. I wasn't really fond of the last season on Starz but, when this show was in its prime, when it was the core group, it had the ability to be amazing. Taking the world/mythos of Doctor Who, the consequences of dealing with alien species etc, into the cop world is a great idea and watching Gwen learn to be a part of Torchwood and then end up being what they all needed to bring them together is such fun.
It also comes with the nostalgia factor. You think, "Oh, Torchwood wasn't that long ago...not much has changed since then..." But, no, it premiered in 2005. That's almost ten years ago. I found myself feeling much the same way I feel when I re-watch Buffy. A lot of, "Aww. I remember when everyone had that shirt/haircut/jacket."
Bonus Bonus Points: This show is sexy. Super sexy. Basically, everyone is omni-sexual and everyone kisses everyone else all the time including that time James Marsters showed up and it was just a ridiculous, sexy kiss-fest.
The Mary Sue (who I've written a few things for) recently published an article by Jarrah Hodge and, basically, I ended up with a new (imagined) BFF. This chick (with some help) put every live action episode of Trek to the Bechdel Test (#1- Two named female characters. #2- They talk. #3-They talk about something other than men.) and reported her findings. Were they super surprising?
Not really. Though, Enterprise really let me down. I love that show and, while I feel that Hoshi and T'Pol both had strong character arcs, it's still disappointing that the ship's Science Officer and Communications Officer had so few (man-less) conversations. My main issue with Enterprise has always been in their missed opportunity to showcase an LGBT character (and you're welcome to read all about that in my love letter to the best Trek romance that never was: Reed and Hayes) but this is also troublesome.
The series that fared better than any other was Voyager. I considered putting a little "of course" in that sentence but, in thinking about this test as applied to Trek, that seems a little counter productive. I've read a lot of fans talking about these results and that seems to be the general attitude. "Of course Voyager passed, it was female centric/heavy/focused/dominated." But... it's not. Not really.
Here's what I did. After reading these results, I queued up Voyager SSN 5. The fifth season of a show is often my favorite--or at least often features a lot of my favorite episodes. It seems to be that time in a show's life when the characters are firmly set, the actors are very comfortable with their roles, and the writers have to dig deep to come up with fresh and interesting story lines. I feel like the fifth season of all these Middle Star Treks (aka- The Unitard Era) is when the show really comes alive so it seems like a good place to give it a test. Ok so, I watched the first three episodes of Season Five of Voyager. And here's what I found:
#2- Each of their stories are driven primarily by a female character (Night: Janeway, Drone: Seven, Extreme Risk: B'Elana) This is a bit of a coincidence. The next episode in the line-up is a Chakota-sode. Still, I think it's a point worth mentioning--especially since the season premier focuses heavily on a female character.
Three women. How does that make the cast female heavy? Here's a little snapshot to better illustrate my point:
So here are nine people. TNG, DS9, and Voyager all had nine-member casts. It's apparently something everyone in development thought was super important from about 1987-1995.
Alright, in TNG you have two regular, female cast members and with an optional third in Tasha/Guinan. DS9 is about the same because you get a rotating cast of female regulars in Kai Wyn, Keiko, Leeta, Kasidy and Ziyal. Anyway, you don't have to have a fancy Starfleet degree in mathematics to figure out that 2-3 out of 9 isn't a majority. It's not even half.
You could say, "Well, the Voyager women are more important in terms of ship's operations." Well, that's true in the case of the Captain, I suppose, and maybe that's the key. Because I don't think that Kira or Dax are less important than Torres or Seven. And the ship's engineer and astrometrics specialist are no more essential than the ship's doctor and counselor (though I would make an argument about Troi's character before/after her Starfleet Uniform) so why is it that Voyager is so far ahead of the other series in terms set forth by the Bechdel Test?
#3- Is it a more specific treatment of the show's female characters in an episode-by-episode and long-term character arc breakdown?
#4- Is it that Voyager was just the most recent after two prior re-envisioning of Star Trek and the writers knew they needed to do something different but then fell off the wagon when it came to Enterprise?
#5- Did Voyager come along at a time when it could be influenced by other pop-culture? Something about the zeitgeist?
I have a few theories but I'm going to explore them in blog posts to come because this is an issue that really interests me. Star Trek is a show that has (obviously) been a huge part of my life and I like thinking about why and how it affects me, and what lessons I can take from it as a human, a woman, and as a writer.
So, because I'd like to talk about each of these ideas and don't want to make your eyeballs bleed by putting it all right here, I plan on, over the next few days, writing about my further explorations in the Trek Bechdel Test. I'm going to watch a few more episodes (probably the same SSN/Eps from DS9 and TNG and some later eps from TOS and ENT) and I'll get back to you. Especially about #3, which is something I've been wanting to write about for a while. Would you like a hint about its subject? Here's my gift to you. I feel like a benevolent parent letting their child shake their Christmas presents.
A Note About The Bechdel Test: I fully realize the Bechdel test isn't a perfect measure of a show's ability to represent strong, female characters but it is telling. And it does present us with a way to observe and analyze the shows/movies we love in a quantifiable way--which can then lead to a dialogue about the treatment of female characters.