Tuesday, July 29, 2008

But, Oddly, I Got an A in Existentialism

I needed to get an official copy of my transcript for this job-hunting nonsense. It took a while because my transcripts are from an era so far back in the mists of time that the records are still on a paper. Someone has to wake up an old monk who must light a taper and make his way through the dusty vaults below the university. He then carefully thumbs through the ancient and illuminated texts until he finds the required text. Then he must make his slow way back out of the vaults and hand over the delicate paper, sepia-toned with age, to one of the young things who will then prepare it for translation.

How else do you explain it taking over a week to get a document housed in a place only 10 miles from where I now live?

Anyway, I have it now and can get on with the business of getting business but I did take a moment this morning to peruse the document.

I sure wasted a lot of time in college.

Oh, my grades were decent enough. I'm graduated with a 3.18 GPA. That's pretty good, considering how half-arsed I was in my approach to most things academic. You can easily tell, for example, that science was not a great love of mine but I never got anything lower than an A in any writing class. It's my course work in Literature that's spotty and it makes me a little sad. Really, I should never have gotten anything less than an A in a lit class. The whole reason I majored in English was so I could read all the time. I loved discovering new authors, actually thinking about and discussing the themes, writing witty and insightful analyses. Seriously, I did. But man, sometimes I managed to slack off, too. When I think of some of the professors I had, the amazing thinkers they were, the challenges they set before me and how I, in my youth and arrogance, gave 'em an intellectual shrug and a "whatever", how I phoned in so many papers because somewhere in my mind I decided it was ok to wait until the last minute and settle for a B than work hard and go for the A.

And it wasn't, you see, the A that was the issue. It was the attitude. The carelessness. The failure to recognize that this collegiate experience was, in fact, a gift and that at no other time ever again in my life would I have the sort of opportunities that were daily spread before me. It was, I fear, a little like going to a banquet and saying, "Eh, I'll just have a cup of the soup".

I know what you're thinking. You're thinking that such is college life. We all do it. We're becoming adults and college is as much about learning to manage yourself as it is anything else. And you'd be right. Certainly that C- in "Men and Women in 19th Century British Literature" is a classic example of what happens when you don't trouble to manage yourself. But it still galls me a little.

Sometimes I wish I could go back and do bits of it again, knowing what I know now. I wish, at least, that I could go back to Dr. Erickson, she of aforementioned Brit Lit class, and ask for a copy of her lectures so I could see what I missed.

Labels:

Wednesday, June 06, 2007

Sur la Table

There are a number of items in the news that bear comment today. However, the thing that struck me was this article in the NY Times. Go ahead and read it. I'll wait.

la la la la la

Ooh, I really need a manicure.

dum di dum di dum

"I'm going down to Liverpool to do nothing..." la la la la la

Edward James Olmos won best actor at the ALMA's last night. I love "Battlestar Galactica".

Maybe red nail polish.

'K, back? That's right, kids, no schaudenfraude about Lewis Libby getting 30 months (whoo to the hoo). We're going to talk about how silly people are about food. I've confessed before to having, once upon a time, been a foodie. Which is why reading about these people in New York engaging in dinner parties like it's some sort of blood sport really got me going. Talk about missing the point.

Breaking bread with someone is one of the most profound symbols in human culture. We come to the table to nourish ourselves and strengthen bonds with others. Period. When feeding others becomes about impressing or even intimidating those gathered, something has gone terribly, terribly wrong.

When we have a dinner party I thoroughly enjoy lavishing attention on the details of the feast with every intention of pleasing my guests. Because I want to please them. I want to do something nice for them and make them feel special. It is not, I repeat not so that they will spend 15 minutes between the entree and cheese courses telling me what a marvel I am.

Granted, a reputation for consistently serving good food has a price. Here is a list of people who cook for us:

The Cardinal and Mr. Mikey
The Neighbor
Seattle Coffee Girl
Jim and Kelly
JJ & Elroy
Stina and Dave
Ree (she rarely entertains but is always happy to bring food to parties)
The Sister-in-Law

This is not to suggest that cooking for us is the only way to prove friendship. There are plenty of people in our lives who show their love and friendship in other ways. That's fine. Not everyone entertains or enjoys cooking like we do.

But it does bother me when people say, and they have, that they are "too intimidated" to cook for me. "Too intimidated". As if I'm that Jeffrey Steingarten person who judges on "Iron Chef America". (He has a book called The Man Who Ate Everything. He regularly gives the impression of being the man who ate everything and didn't enjoy any of it. Ever. And furthermore, holds you in contempt for daring to cook).

This intimidation, and I know because I've asked, hasn't to do with me being some hard-to-please snoot, insufferably inquiring as to the pedigree of the brie. "Oh, no, it's just that you do it so well and I'd be embarrassed to serve you ordinary food".

Ordinary food. That's funny. Because I cook ordinary food. It isn't sprinkled with fairy dust or gilded or brought to the table on angel wings. Good food, lovingly prepared is all that is required for a nice dinner. Do you hear me? Food as art, the dinner party as weapon...this is so not the point. Crack open a bottle of 3 Buck Chuck, throw something on the grill and have a party. Lighten up.

It almost makes me not want to write about food anymore because it makes me feel I might be contributing to the madness. If joy, affection and a sense of celebration - even if you are only (only?) celebrating the gift of being alive together - isn't at the heart of your meal then what is the point? I'd rather have a dried out pork chop offered in love than duck breast in peach sauce served with ulterior motives.

One of the things I'm most looking forward to about our trip to Chicago is cooking for people. And Jon and I are looking forward to cooking together. Because it will be fun. Because it will be a way of showing these heretofore virtual friends that I care about them. I don't worry that I must somehow prove myself and therefore everything must be perfect or the whole evening will be ruined and my reputation along with it. If something goes awry we'll send out for pizza. I hear they have pretty good deep-dish pie in the Windy City. Maybe I'll screw up dinner on purpose.

Let's have some fun. I hereby invite you to a virtual pot luck. I'm making a simple roast chicken. What are you bringing?

Labels: , , , , , ,