Indefinite hiatus

Dear readers, you may have noticed my absence over the past few months — apologies! Surviving graduate school has consumed far more of my energy than I anticipated. I will say that, in response to my last blog, the eye surgery was a resounding success! The subject of this blog is “Indefinite hiatus” because I anticipate that this term will require even more energy than last term, and also because I am not so sure what this blog is about any more. Since becoming a teaching assistant for my university’s first-year English course, I realized how much I love working with undergraduate students — and so I am actually exploring Student Affairs (specifically housing) as a career option, instead of publishing! Maybe graduate school is good for something after all … (Wink, wink.)

But in all seriousness, until I figure out just where this blog (and my life?) is headed, I’ll have to leave you all in suspense.

Best of luck until next time,

Caleigh

The first week after PRK eye surgery

Crazy, right? PRK eye surgery! (PRK is, if you didn’t know, a variation on the [in?]famous LASIK procedure to fix poor vision.) In a very last-minute optometrist appointment, I decided to go for the surgery and hope for the best — and all this only one week before my move to British Columbia (!).

I had hoped for LASIK originally — it boasts a much faster recovery time — but the docs said my corneas were too thin to be safe for LASIK. Also, in the end PRK surgery normally results in a more stable eye due to the lack of a flap in the cornea.

Today marks the eighth day after the surgery.

The surgery: Friday, August 19th, at around 2:00pm

I was, frankly, petrified. The mild sedative didn’t seem to do much for my nerves and although I managed to put on a good face before the actual surgery, I was definitely not prepared for the surgery itself. Since my pre-PRK eyes had wildly different prescriptions, my right eye suffered through thirty-two seconds under the laser while my left eye enjoyed a comparably blissful fourteen. Really, not so bad and completely, utterly painless — but the wild colours and scary black hole in the middle of my vision were enough to send me blubbering to my mother afterwards. (The other two women getting the procedure were much more stoic than me. I’m a crier.)

Right after the surgery

My vision was great! I couldn’t believe it. It felt a little weird, somehow, but definitely much more clarity than I used to have. I was extremely sensitive to bright light but fortunately the clinic gave me totally rad galactic sunglasses to sport for the next couple days while I recovered.

After the anesthetic wore off … (Approximately thirty minutes later.)

At this point, my eyes were sore and I was being liberal with my eye drops. The rule was no television, reading or computer for at least seventy-two hours after the surgery, so not only was I in pain, but I was also bored stiffless — until I opened up my Audible, that is! I listened to a couple different Audiobooks — Path of Daggers by Robert Jordan (book 8 of The Wheel of Time), The Magician King by Lev Grossman, and a hilarious hour of David Sedaris Live at Carnegie Hall — fantastic!

All in all, the pain really wasn’t that bad. I used my various eye drops diligently, kept my eyes closed most of the time and never took off the sunglasses. Plus my vision was still actually pretty good!

The trouble begins

Trouble #1: I woke up in the middle of the night after my surgery in EXCRUCIATING pain. I felt a serious burning sensation in first my right eye, then my left. I had my ‘night mask’ on, so couldn’t apply any drops — though I’m not sure I could have opened my eyes to administer the drops even if I weren’t wearing the goggles. The pain was slightly less so long as I kept the eyes closed. I have no idea how long the pain lasted, but I do know that eventually it did subside and I fell back asleep. In the morning it was just a nasty nightmare. Apart from a slight replay of pain on the second night, I haven’t experienced anything like it since.

Trouble #2: Yikes! My vision had disappeared overnight. It was difficult to see much of anything. My doctor prepared me for this fact but still, it was a bit of a bummer after seeing so clearly right after the surgery. Luckily, each one of my follow-up appointments — one a day! — confirmed that I was on the mend.

I spent the weekend alone in a small, dark room, listening — and falling asleep — to the audiobooks on my computer.

Three days after the surgery

The bandage contact lenses, inserted right after the surgery, were finally removed on Monday. Well, one of the contact lenses, anyway. One of my damned eyes was healing much faster than the other. At this point my eyes didn’t feel quite as ‘weird’ as they had on the weekend, but they were certainly still very blurry, and in fact my vision wavered considerably from morning to night.

The next day, Tuesday, meant the removal of the contact lens in my right eye. At this point my left eye had recovered quite a bit and I could see again respectably. Not as well as with my glasses, of course, but still — pretty good. My right eye was a mess.

On Wednesday, my left eye improved further, and in the morning, anyway, seemed pretty close to perfect. Of course by evening my left eye had gone to hell again and my right eye, surprisingly, was catching up! So confusing. The doctor said this was mainly due to severe dryness — a very common side-effect after the surgery — but that if I kept up with hourly lubricating eye drops, I should have very clear vision in a couple of weeks.

Thursday revealed my left eye to once again be excellent and my right eye pretty darn good, too. Yippee! Strangely, though, I was still having difficulty reading things close-up, particularly my computer screen. Sure, I could see it — but it was definitely much blurrier than with glasses, even though my long-distance vision now is, from what I can tell, up to what I used to have (in the mornings at least — like I said, it gets worse as the day wears on).

Yesterday: One week later

I went to the doctor for my “tenth day check-up” (really seventh day, but I’m moving to BC tomorrow) and told her about my concerns. We checked it out and it turns out that both of my eyes are now very slightly over-corrected. “Better to be over-corrected than under-corrected!” she said cheerfully. Since I forgot to ask, I’m not sure whether to expect this to resolve as my eyes continue to heal, or whether I’ll just have to a) buy reading glasses or b) get used to the blur. She did mention that my over-correction is so slight that it may be difficult to find reading glasses at this level, and that most people simply deal with it. I’m just used to the crystal clarity of my glasses and contacts of old.

I’m not too concerned about this, except that I’m starting graduate school in a few days and can expect to do a ton of reading once that starts — more than I would be normally, that’s for sure. I don’t want to suffer headaches or a slower reading speed because I can’t see the text as well as I used to. I think, in the end, I’ll probably pick up some reading glasses to help — but I can only hope for now that my eyes will improve with a little more time. Something to ask the doctor next time I see her, I suppose.

Final thoughts?

So far, despite my trouble reading, I’m glad I got the surgery. I’ve always hated the look of glasses on me and contact lenses were a big pain in the rear end. I’m also happy that, since I underwent PRK so young, I’ll get to enjoy this great vision for a long, long time before my vision begins to deteriorate from age — and hey, since my eyes are over-corrected, I’m only going to deteriorate into *perfection*! Ha! So long as I can get a pair of reading glasses, I think I’m in good shape.

If you’re thinking about PRK eye surgery, feel free to give me an email if you’ve got any other questions about my experience. I’m not a doctor at all, but I can still tell you about what happened to me and how I felt.

More updates to come as the situation develops…

Rethinking our fictional heroes

First of all, I’ve got to apologize for my prolonged absence! Justin came to visit for the past week and seeing as we’re spending the next year on opposite sides of the country, I decided the blog would just have to play second fiddle to my sweetie.

Luckily I found inspiration yesterday in a really fascinating blog post by Ana Mardoll on what she calls “the curse of the smart girl.” I recommend you read the article — and the comments — but the gist of it is that Mardoll argues that the Smart Girl, so common to today’s fiction, isn’t a strong female character but is actually a narrative prop. The Smart Girl allows the author to stick in plot exposition and “becomes the narrative voice that is so hard to achieve in a first-person novel,” writes Mardoll. The Smart Girl allows the main, plucky hero — Mardoll uses Percy Jackson as her example — to remain ignorant, just like the book’s audience, so that the audience can continue to relate to the hero. The Smart Girl never rescues anyone except the hero, but the hero’s continued existence is never in any doubt anyway since the book is in first-person. “The Smart Girl,” Ana Mardoll concludes, “is smart so that she can be bested by the brave and plucky hero.”

Seriously, just go read the blog yourself. Particularly the last paragraph or two. I just got a shiver re-reading it.

In a lot of ways I think Ana Mardoll is right. From my personal experience, I think there is a surprising proliferation of Smart Girls in fiction, and perhaps not as many female plucky heroes (and far, far fewer Smart Boys). This might just be due to the fact that I’m reading the wrong books, and if you have any recommendations of Smart Boys and plucky female heroes, let me know! I also think Mardoll is right to determine that this Smart Girl/plucky boy hero trope is so ubiquitous that many people don’t even recognize it’s a trope any more; we just assume Smart Girl means strong female character, so who cares if the main character who does all the badassery is actually male? Who cares that the Smart Girl is, in many ways, just a narrative tool?

So, all of that sounds like accurate analysis to me.

But …

I did have some questions after these paragraphs:

The Smart Girl is smart so that she can be bested by the brave and plucky Hero. She has a high Int score and can provide necessary plot exposition, but every other stat is ultimately her dump stat. She isn’t as strong as the hero and will frequently bring a knife or a bow to what is clearly a sword fight, as we see in the many, many battles where Percy’s sword is the one weapon that dishes out serious harm to the monsters they face. She isn’t as fast as the hero, and can’t take as many hits as he can — expect to see her flung across the room and knocked unconscious at least once per book while the hero can take similar hits and keep going by the Power of Pluckiness. She’s not as charismatic as the hero — a point that will be explicitly called out in text when someone wonders why Ignorant McKnowsnothing is the leader instead of the Smart Girl; the handwave will be that he alone has a hero’s heart and the masses will follow only him because of it. And though she is smarter than the hero, she will never be wiser than him; her “book smarts” will leave her cold and unable to follow her heart and make the right choice that the Hero will know instinctively to make.

When the book is over and the Hero has won, the future is bleak for the Smart Girl. Now that she is no longer needed as a plot exposition device, she will be downgraded to a trophy for the Hero. At best, she will be allowed to use her smarts to help the new world order; she will be an adviser, a vizier, a source to be listened to when convenient and ignored when not. At worst, she will be nothing more than the Wise Wife, useful only for soulful pillow talk where she soothes her kingly husband after a long day and provides lovely heirs that are smart and male — the best of both their parents’ attributes, of course.

[Bold is mine.]

After some thought, I figured out my problem. I just don’t believe that there’s anything actually problematic or secondary with being a) weak in battle; b) not charismatic; c) becoming an adviser or vizier or a stay-at-home spouse, which are, actually, extremely important roles in any organization. I don’t believe that any of those qualities prevent a person from being heroic, and, in fact, I think all three qualities can contribute to a person’s (character’s?) heroism.

Why do we automatically associate heroism with strength and power and willfulness and leadership(/bossiness)? I acknowledge that there’s a problem that the majority of female characters are of the same, particular “Smart Girl” type, but I also think there’s a problem that the majority of male characters are pigeon-holed into the same, particular “Plucky Hero” type.

I suppose what I want to do here is reframe the problem. This isn’t a problem of female characters being depicted as unheroic Smart Girls and later becoming viziers/advisers/stay-at-home moms. This is a problem of a lack of alternative heroic personalities in fiction, female or male. Why can’t intelligence, peace-keeping and a supportive or care-taking personality be heroic? Why do we assume strength in battle and a forceful personality(/pluckiness) are the most important qualities in a hero? Can someone be equally heroic without those qualities?

I’d like to read about quiet heroes, lonely heroes, heroes who believe in compromise, non-violent and pacifist heroes, care-taker heroes, physically weak heroes, cautious heroes, female heroes* and male heroes. I do realize that there are already many books that feature unconventional heroes — but in my experience the norm does still lean towards strength, charisma, power, etc. I’m not sure that norm is a good thing. Our world needs all sorts of people, and if all we had were people who liked to lead and fight, we would never get anything done. (Trust me. I’ve been on a team like that before!)

Anyway, I don’t want to detract from Ana Mardoll’s post too much. I think it’s a great read and definitely food for thought. I also acknowledge that there is a problem when characters are made to act in certain ways and become certain things (the Wise Wife) based solely on their gender. However, I think the solution is not just limited to creating more plucky, aggressive female heroes, even if the hero’s name is Katniss. We also need to envision a world where heroism is recognized in a wider variety of personality traits and positions.

But what do you think?

* Yes, I realize that normally one would write “heroine” instead of “female hero.” But just like the words “authoress” and “heiress” and even “actress” occasionally bug me, sometimes I get a little bothered by “heroine,” too. This is my blog, so deal with it

Reading an anthology for the first time

Well, the title isn’t entirely true. I’ve read anthologies before: plenty in class, a couple for work at the Porcupine’s Quill. But I’ve never bought an anthology, with my own money, to read for pleasure.

Why not? I’m not entirely sure. I’ve always thought I preferred novels — more in-depth, immersive, something to really get lost in. I’ve always preferred movies to television, too. But then I saw Songs of Love & Death and, more importantly, its impressive contributor list: Neil Gaiman, Jacqueline Carey, Robin Hobb, Peter S. Beagle, Tanith Lee, and a host of others I hadn’t read but had heard great things of. So, how could I resist?

I’m about a third of the way through the book, which means I’ve read five and a bit short stories: “Love Hurts” by Jim Butcher, “The Marrying Maid” by Jo Beverley, “Rooftops” by Carrie Vaughn, “Hurt Me” by M. L. N. Hanover, “Demon Lover” by Cecelia Holland, and just getting through “The Wayfarer’s Advice” by Melinda M. Snodgrass.

Thoughts so far?

Wicked.

I’m a total anthology convert now. I haven’t enjoyed every story in Songs of Love & Death — discovering a particular dislike for “The Marrying Maid,” actually — but it’s actually really refreshing to skip from world to world, character to character, and sampling a whole range of writing styles and topics in the span of a few hundred pages. I already know for sure that I’m going to hunt down The Dresden Files (finally) and also anything by M. L. N. Hanover, and I haven’t even reached the authors I’m most excited for yet (namely Neil Gaiman … *fangirl dance*).

Anyway. I just thought I’d write a blog to show others out there that anthologies are really awesome and worth trying out, particularly if you’re looking for some new talent to read. Thanks to the melodramatic title and the editorial namedropping (George R. R. Martin, what) for convincing me to pick up a new sort of book!