2010 Metamorphosism St. Valentine’s Day Limerick Contest

IMPORTANT NOTICE: THERE HAS BEEN A LAST-MINUTE RULE CHANGE! SEE BELOW!

Things you should know, in no particular order:

This contest has been going for years, and is extremely popular. The entries are awe-inspiring. Last year some of the winners got a prize. This year, I have saved one or more of my books (Little-Known Facts) and will award it/them as a prize. I think I will get someone else to adjudicate the contest for me this year. THE DEADLINE IS  13 FEBRUARY 2010. Winners will be announced on Valentine’s Day.

RULES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. That’s just the way life is. Anything else would be, like, trying to deny this fact about our existence. Here are the rules at the present moment:

  1. Entries must be a limerick. Go to wikipedia.org, type “limerick” in the box, go to the entry about the poetic form, not the town, and read.
  2. Or google it, or whatever you people do.
  3. Limericks must include a structural misconception.
  4. Extra points for composers, musical forms, and Mahatma Gandhi jokes.
  5. Report on last year’s contest here.
  6. The arbitrary structural misconception rule was throwing people off (it was that, right?) so that has been eliminated. And composers have been done before, I think. And Gandhi wasn’t really being milked for the maximum comedy there, despite the fact that he used to sleep naked with young women to test his resolve, according to Wikipedia or someplace.
  7. So instead, the following rules will be in place:
  8. The limericks must be, as limericks often are, about love, especially its dodgier aspects BUT however use of the word “love” will result in instant disqualification. (Gamma suggested that one, I’m so proud.)
  9. Extra points will be awarded for the following: disgraced medical treatments, freshwater amoeba, character actors from the “That Guy” list of actors, skeletal bones, Irish politics, Irish writers, legal concepts, punctuation, and apocrypha.

SUBMIT ENTRIES IN THE COMMENTS TO THIS POST! Please include a valid email address (not posted) so that you can be contacted in case you win. Or don’t, whatever.

10 things about me

  1. My tailbone hurts from sitting in a loafing position all day.
  2. I am getting low on wiper fluid, which is bad, because there’s lots of salt on the roads right now, meaning that I have to ration it when I drive, the wiper fluid, squirting just enough at one time to clean a little spot on the windshield enough to see the road.
  3. I plan to get more wiper fluid when I fill my tank tonight.
  4. It turns out I am a cabbage-soup-diet recidivist. I swore never to do this again because glucose starvation made me so demented last time, yet here I am again, three kilos down for the time being. I’m doing okay, though. I was a wreck yesterday, but concentration and so on is better today.
  5. It was foggy on the part of my morning commute where I drive through the woods, and the trees were covered with frost.
  6. I can’t find my Bach cello suites CDs, which sucks because I am currently trying to learn part of a suite right now.  I suck at cello, by the way, but less than I thought I did, and less than I used to.
  7. Being a beggar, I cannot be a chooser.
  8. I’m really enjoying “The Rest is Noise.” It is a useful history of 20th-century music, because when I finish reading it, not only will I have a general idea of the current state of music, I will also be able to crack coconuts with a single blow. Here is a site that goes with the book.
  9. I am so hungry for bacon. My wife and I are going to a ball this weekend, and should be practicing our dance steps, which we seem to have forgotten (or, which I seem to have, at least) but so far we’ve been too knackered.
  10. Metamorphosism Valentine’s Day Limerick Contest 2010 starts next week. This year with even more arbitrary rules and biased judging!
  11. This might be the first time I’ve ever finished one of these lists.
  12. I could go on and on.

Careers in Science: Sentimental Meteorology

The sentimental meteorologist lies in bed reading a book about weather, wondering how many other sciences are expected by people to be wrong as much as they are right, and whether that means it’s a good job. He wonders about the most visible representatives of his profession, television weatherpersons, and how they often seem to be the comic relief on the news team — you have the anchorpersons, the sportspersons with the Frida Kahlo eyebrows, and the weatherpersons cracking jokes. As if the anchorpersons are chosen to physically represent journalistic integrity and authority, the sportspersons athleticism and a fascination with statistics, and weatherpersons science itself — a little goofy, a little aspergerish. People you could imagine forgetting their spouses at a rest stop.

The sentimental meteorologist is reading a book about weather because he wants to finally understand what causes fog. The book discusses every type of weather in detail, except for fog.

What  is it about fog, the sentimental meteorologist wonders.

Also, why was a cat sleeping under his pillow last night? What’s up with that? This makes him wonder if cats are a vector for lice in humans, and if humans can get ear mites.

And then everything itches.

Rest stops. The sentimental meteorologist would never forget his spouse at a rest stop, probably. Or a kid. Probably depends how tired he got.

The sentimental meteorologist wonders whether he should have studied optics or something, because of this: he has this idea right now that literature sucks because books contain the wrong light, or none at all. They lack the beautiful light of real life: the changing light of a baseball stadium open to the sky during an evening game, the light of supermarkets, sunrise and dusk, fog. The blue glow of television at night seen from the street by a lonely man. A campfire. A chemical factory burning down. A blinking cursor is no match for these things. Sunlight on snow. Oncoming headlights on high beam. A copy maching copying while left open. The immigration line at an airport at night. Restaurant windows at night in the rain. A squall. Heat lightning of a summer night while the family is out late, burning the brush pile and talking. A car with one headlight. A warning light on your dashboard you’ve never seen before when you’ve just emptied out your savings account. A strong flashlight held to a child’s hand in a dark room, a strong flashlight held in your mouth. Street lights coming on irregularly, or going off, or both. The light native to certain places, like Provence, or the Low Countries, or where the sentimental meteorologist lives. Hazy summer light, clear winter skies, light before a snow: black clouds, bright along the horizon. Natural light, manmade light. A lit apartment seen from a dark apartment. A woman in the bath tub at night seen by whispering boys outside. The light in a church. The light at a funeral not in a church. A light dimming and dying like a pen going dry.

The sentimental meteorologist tells himself that he has the feeling that his soldiers are massing along the border of a country and will invade soon and everything will be okay, but he doesn’t know what country.

Maybe he should have studied geography.

Everyone says fog is caused by water vapor in the air. Duh, thinks the sentimental meteorologist. But how does it get there, in the case of fog? Warm water and cold air? Cold water and warm air? Can’t be the latter, water is usually colder than air, right?

Predictions for 2010

  1. It will be foggy
  2. I will sleep until 8 AM
  3. Which is really late by my standards
  4. The cats will be hungry
  5. But the picky, sensitive red cat still won’t eat anything with the others
  6. It will be foggy
  7. The coffee is done
  8. Everyone else will still be asleep
  9. I will be really happy I didn’t set anything on fire with those pretty big skyrockets I was shooting off last night
  10. From a friend’s roof
  11. Which was made of grass
  12. It will be foggy
  13. And now smells a lot like fireworks
  14. But I did apologize
  15. That’s what happens when you invite pyromaniacs to a New Year’s party
  16. “Party”
  17. Man there were some funny people there
  18. The decade won’t actually end for another year
  19. It’s not hard to figure out. I mean, count to ten.
  20. There: What number did you start with, zero?
  21. Or one?
  22. Putz.
  23. It will be foggy

I’m sorry, but 2010 is going to fucking suck

Some newsletter I subscribe to said something about how hard 2009 was on many of us and how 2010 had to be an improvement because it couldn’t be worse, and I just thought, baby you ain’t seen nothing yet. This was a writing newsletter, I think – how could any sort of writer lack imagination to the extent that they think nothing could be worse than, what, fattening up a few fat cats with taxpayers’ money etc? I can think of plenty of worse things.

Also, there is the jinxing thing. Seriously, that’s a big concern. Even if you’re optimistic, you’re supposed to say things like, 2009, you thought that was bad? 2010 is going to fucking suck, pal. Why do you think the military has been investing so much in drones, robots and non-lethal technology? Because they expect domestic uprisings and conflicts, and human soldiers are unlikely to be real motivated when it comes to using lethal technology on fellow citizens. They’ll spray them with glue, nets and rays that make them hot and stuff, though, and you can always find a few psychos to fly the drones or drive the robots. Amirite?

2010 is going to make 2009 look like Let’s Make a Deal and you had everything in your purse that Monty Hall was looking for when he came out into the audience, and you took the $50 he gave you for the bottle opener with the picture of the Pope on it and put it in the nickel slot machine in Reno and, jackpot! Cups and cups of nickels. That’s what 2009 is going to look like, looking back on it in 2010.

2010 is going to make us wish it was 2012.

We are all going to get on each other’s nerves in 2010 and bicker. No replacement for Lady Gaga will come along, either, until 2011 at the earliest. I won’t figure out yet how to get interesting sounds out of my Jomox T-Resonater.

People with more money than they can possibly spend in a lifetime will continue to accumulate more, and won’t be taxed down to a level where they have the maximum amount a person could possibly spend in a lifetime, for some fucking reason.

The Mazda guy will, however, fix my broken shock absorber first thing, as soon as January 2010 rolls around and he reopens.

He’s on vacation right now. Good for him. We all deserve a little vacation.

Despite this dire outlook, all the best to you, personally. May 2010 not suck for you, dude.

Love

is all you need.

later, tater.

ps favorite sister-in-law just left. we killed a bottle of pink champagne. now i’m working on some becherovka in honour of some friends up north we’ll visit soon. in a day or so. so forgive me if i forgo drunken blogging for christmas.

all the best to you.

Dear Goodreads, you guys are morans

I was reading “Handling the Undead” (John Ajvide Lindqvist, Quercus, 384 pp, 1900, according to Amazon, also morans) and wondered what other people thought about it, and checked goodreads.com. And then I got curious whether anyone I knew had written anything about it there, so I created an account and checked to see if anyone I knew was there, and instead goodreads sent out invitations to everyone or something. Which is fine, I guess, except that it used made-up names for some reason. Which is funny.

[pause for canned laughter to abate]

Now if I could only get goodreads to stop posting to my twitter account every time I blow my nose. Guess I’ll go change permissions there if I remember to.

[more canned laughter]

Not sure what you think of Lindqvist. I loved “Let the Right One In,” not least because it was sort of detoxifying after Twilight.

[applause, and hooting]

And the p3d0 angle was way creepier than anything else I’ve ever read in any vampire story. So I had high hopes for “Handling the Undead”. Who are known as the “reliving” in the book, which I thought was a nice touch. And I was not disappointed with the book, although I did not think it was as excellent as “Let the Right One In”, I thought it was very good.

See, it’s my review-writing style that makes me hesitant to post to goodreads.

[canned laughter]

Lindqvist does interesting things with the rules of the genre.

I like how the zombies are nearly, but not entirely, blank. And how it is not clear, really, until the end, what is behind the event, what the evil thing in the book is.

And other stuff that would be spoilers if I described it.

Jesus, spoilers, gotta remember that if you write about stuff like this.

I am trying to do something zombie related, something involving words on paper, so this was interesting for me for that reason as well. My idea was more B-movieish, but this gives me more ambition.

For what, really, is the difference between “literature” and genre writing, but ambition and quality?

[canned laughter]