Resume life in three, two, one.

The month of November was one of the busiest and personally challenging months of my life. Outside of the usual cooking, cleaning, and handful of Supernatural episodes, November revolved around writing, thinking about writing, and more writing. (Oh, and Thanksgiving, which was a week of cooking and giving the dishwasher the workout of its life.) Pretty tedious, eh? And I only did half the word count that most people undertook.

So, I managed just shy of 26,000 words, which is about 1,000 words over my goal. Within those 26,000 words, the main character began her quest for healing, love, and passion, but she still has a long way to go before she finds happiness. At least 50,000 more words and a lot more drama until she finds her happy ending. Wanna hear more? Sorry, it isn't written yet.

Now that NaNoWriMo is over, it's time to have a life outside of Regency England, as fun as it was. I still have a two tons of proofreading to work on, which will probably consume a good chunk of December (and many following months). And there's always continuing to write, or pretending to write in the least.

December means keeping my house clean, cooking my husband real meals instead of heating up leftovers at every chance I have, and watching two handfuls of Supernatural episodes a day. I also have numerous quilt projects to work on, including a new mystery quilt from Border Creek Station, table runner bindings, and other unfinished projects. Oh, and I have a couple computer, Xbox, and PS3 games which have been dying for my attention, along with all the blog posts I've been mentally drafting for the last month. And seriously, I need to stop even opening Facebook because everyone keeps posting delicious looking recipes that I know my husband will love.

So now it's time to go get dinner, watch more Supernatural, and paint my nails blue. Why? Because it's advent, silly. Who doesn't paint their nails according to the liturgical calendar?

Challenging my Creativity

For years (and yes, I mean years) I have wanted to participate in NaNoWriMo. For those of you who think that I've learned to speak Japanese, that is an acronym for National November Writing Month. The purpose of this trend within the writing community is to encourage people to write a 50,000 word novel in a month.

As an aspiring author, NaNoWriMo has always been an appealing challenge that I wanted to participate in, but something always got in the way. Typically, it was that pesky thing called college, but now that I have my degree, the only excuse I have to not participate is a dirty house and an overflowing laundry hamper. Fortunately, cleaning and folding clothing are perfect breaks for me, and breaks give me the opportunity to mentally draft the next chapter.

What will I be spending the month of November writing, you ask? Well, I don't want to give away too much of the plot, but my most recent creation is a wealthy widow who returns to Regency London after living abroad for a decade. Upon arriving, she experiences love, lust, heartbreak, and happiness, all while coping with the death of her husband, the wild behavior of her step son, and the wrath of her bitter, fortune-seeking mother. Sound wickedly fantastic? I think so too.

I have never lacked the creativity of writing a couple hundred page novel; I can make literary figures suffer in more ways and jump through more hoops than some people could imagine possible. My weakness lies in my perfectionist personality. It could easily take me a few hours to write a page due to changing the wording of a sentence fifteen times before being satisfied with the result. Therefore, while I will still strive to write 50,000 words, I will first work toward 25,000 words that have not been changed half a dozen times. Perhaps I am not pushing myself as much by lowering my expectations, but housewives do have some duties other than cleaning the bathroom and going to the grocery store!

I strongly encourage all my friends who are interested in writing to consider participating in NaNoWriMo. It doesn't matter if your writing is horrible, or if you start over because you hate everything you've written. There's only one way to improve: practice. Visit the NaNoWriMo website here for more information. Happy writing, everyone!

Here's a helpful guide that outlines every author's life.

A Day in the Life of a Navy Wife

Contrary to popular belief, being a military spouse (even as a housewife) isn't all fun and games. Sure the pay and benefits are fantastic... but when the Navy decides to throw a wrench in all your plans, you start to ask yourself if it's really worth it. So here's a day in my life as the wife of a naval avaitor-in-training.

***

0700: Wake up. Roll over. Husband? Nope, not there. Oh right, now I remember. He had a 6:30 brief for a flight at... I can't remember the time. But he'll be home... sometime.

0715: Coffee.

0800: What am I doing today? Um. Proofreading (assuming I can concentrate), reading, sewing. I should probably do dishes. And clean things. The living room looks like a tornado hit a flight school, but I have to accept the fact that there are things I can't change in life. Like the fact that airplanes are the only topic of conversation in our house anymore.

0830: I should get breakfast. But I really like Facebook right now.

0900: What am I making for dinner? Well, that depends on what is going on tomorrow. Does my husband have a flight? I don't know, and I won't know until this evening. So... what should I bring down from the freezer? I better plan for him having a flight, even though it'll probably get canceled due to weather because Florida hates everyone. (You are probably asking, what is the correlation between flying and dinner? Well, certain foods cause air sickness, so if the husband has a flight, he eats very light dinners.)

1000: I believe I hear the husband's truck backing into the driveway.

1002: Mmmm. Flight suit.

1015: How was your flight? Oh, it was canceled due to weather. Shocking. Yeah, it does look nasty outside. Do you have a flight tomorrow? No, you aren't on the tentative schedule. Do you have duty tomorrow? No, not as far as you know. Well, that's helpful. Kinda. But I still won't change what I'm planning on cooking.

T-6 Texan, the training plane used at NASWF.

1100: Craaaap. Does he have clean undershirts and socks for tomorrow? When did I last do laundry? Oh, he doesn't have any more tan shirts clean to go with the tan flight suit, but he still has some black shirts. I guess he's wearing the green flight suit, then.

1200: Lunch.

1230: "Oh look, the clouds are going away! Someone can fly! Not me, but someone." (Yes, my husband just said that.)

1300: The guys are coming over for dinner. Advanced notice is for losers. Guess the steak is going back into the freezer. I have nothing else that will feed four people and keep in mind food restrictions. Oh, John thinks he only has a sim tomorrow? That helps SO much. I guess it's time to rearrange the menu or run to the commissary... But I don't feel like going out. I can rearrange the menu. Burgers it is.

1400: More coffee, this time with booze. It's 5 o'clock somewhere.

1500: If the guys are coming over, I need to make sure the house looks semi presentable. But... netflix.

1600: OK, now I actually have to do things. Like start dinner.

1700: Is the schedule out yet? No. Isn't it supposed to come out around this time? Yes.

1730: Look! Avaitors! Guess what the topic of conversation is going to be tonight. And guess how much of it I'm going to understand.

1800: Is the schedule out yet? No. Wasn't it supposed to be out an hour ago? Yes.

1900: How about now? Oh, the schedule is finally out! What do you have duty tomorrow? No. Do you have a flight tomorrow? Yes. So the tentative schedule lied? Yes. I'm glad I planned for a flight even though you didn't think you'd have one. What time is the flight? 1700? Great. Right over dinner. I guess I'm having leftovers tomorrow and you're eating when you get home. Oh but it'll probably be canceled because the weather forecast looks bad? There's nothing like having no clue what your work schedule is for the next day.

2000: Well, at least we can stay up later since the flight is way too freaking late. Never mind, we're old people. Lets go sit in bed for an hour and read because we're tired. Or fall asleep at 8:30...

***

Obviously not all of these things happen every day, otherwise I would have admitted myself to the insane asylum months ago. But every. single. day. I have to figure out what I'm cooking and try to guess what the flight schedule will be hours before it comes out. And when it does come out, it's normally several hours after it is supposed to come out. It is impossible to plan anything for the following day, because without a doubt if we want to do something, he'll be on the schedule for something. Of course, whether a flight actually happens is weather, instructor, and plane dependent, and all have a habit of being uncooperative. Some weeks are worse than others, but I'm still looking forward to the end of flight school, whenever that may be. And despite the negative sides of his flight training, I'm still thankful that my husband has a steady job that he enjoys.

Welcome to the Navy. Just remember: Semper Gumby. Always flexible.

The husband's squadron patch -- VT-2 Doerbirds.

That Ain't No Way to Treat a Lady

I grew up listening to country music. The country mentality fit with my lifestyle more than rap, pop, or any other type of music. Throughout high school and half of college, I stopped listening to country music because I recognized that some country artists were more trashy than country. Eventually I realized that not all country artists are trashy, and thus I began listening again.

I've learned to overlook the occasional trashy song that comes onto the radio, although the inability for country music to differentiate between white trash and redneck still bothers me. But another trend has arisen in country music, one that I think is more serious than the handful of trashy country songs.

Country music doesn't respect women anymore.

Honestly, it isn't just country music; it's a general lack of respect for people throughout modern culture. I grew up with the ideal that country boys knew how to treat a lady -- with respect and kindness. Fortunately, I married a country boy who does treat me well. Those of you who know me know that I am far from a feminist, but I do believe strongly that everyone deserves respect. Feminists demand equality; a lady demands respect.

But think about it. The majority of country music artists are guys, therefore the focus is on women. Every other song on the radio is about 1. a guy seeing a hot girl and hooking up with her, 2. a guy picking up a hot girl at the bar and taking her home, or 3. a guy seeing a hot girl, thinking that she looks good, and wanting to be with her. It's all the same theme with different variations. Sure, there's the occasional break up or drinking song, but the popular songs are the ones that talk about a girl's looks and the desire to be physical with her.

A couple months ago, I discovered this song. If you haven't seen the music video, it's hysterical and I highly suggest listening/watching before reading the rest of this post.

These girls are spot on. Here are the lyrics to the chorus:

Bein' the girl in a country song
How in the world did it go so wrong?
Like all we're good for
Is looking good for you and your friends on the weekend
Nothing more
We used to get a little respect
Now we're lucky if we even get
To climb up in your truck, keep my mouth shut and ride along
And be the girl in a country song

If all I was only good for was looking good for my husband, I never would have married him. To quote Jane Eyre, "I am a free human being with an independent will." I have ideas, desires, and interests that surpass my beauty by far. I have worth beyond my inadequate looks. And I'm not the only woman in the world who doesn't wish to be desirable because of her beauty. I would guess that most mature and sensible women wish to be judged for their mind, not their body.

The unforeseen issue that arises from such a focus is a lack of respect. Is checking out a girl's body, or even a guy's body because women aren't immune to this, and lusting after that person respectful? Certainly not. It isn't respectful to them or yourself. Focusing on the physical aspect instead of the intellectual, emotional, and spiritual aspects causes many of the issues which plague society today. I know so many people who lament the inability to find a suitable significant other and, potentially, future spouse. Modern culture tells us that finding romantic happiness is going to the bar, seeing someone desirable, and making a move. I project that this leads to many more one night stands or relationships founded on physical desires, which in turn result in heartbreak, unexpected pregnancy, and even divorce.

My favorite line in this song sums it up: "That ain't no way to treat a lady." I know that some women have no desire to be a "lady", mainly because feminism makes women want to be less feminine. Being a lady doesn't mean sipping tea from a tea cup and discussing fashion and society all day. Being a lady is knowing what is proper and keeping your legs crossed. Most people would probably say that I am old fashioned, and they would be right. But I also have standards for myself and being judged as trashy or rude isn't one of them. And being a lady doesn't prohibit you from doing fun things like drinking, 4-wheeling, cursing, or shooting. Few people would disagree that I'm a lady, and I drink whiskey straight from the bottle and I can curse well enough to make a sailor blush. (If you don't believe me, come visit while we're playing COD.)

The media (music, television, etc) projects an image that the young and influential strive to achieve. In the country world, girls want to wear cut-offs or tight jeans and ornate cowboy boots, and guys look for that in a female. I won't lie, my favorite jeans are rather tight and I wear short shorts. But if I'm doing anything "country", I'm in work jeans and work boots.

Last time I was visiting home, I finally got to try out my dad's 4-wheeler, which he got shortly before I moved to Florida. As you can see, work jeans, boots, an old SLP t-shirt, and a Navy ball cap. Be smart, ladies.

News flash: cut offs and tight jeans are really useless unless you're going out. Try throwing hay bales, or doing any type of work on the farm, in shorts and a tank top. Your arms and legs will be scratched to Hell within about twenty minutes. And your pretty little boots will be ruined the second you step in the mud. And seriously, when the sun sets, you're going to be freezing in cut offs. But if you like being uncomfortable, be my guest.

So men, have a little respect for ladies. Don't look for a pretty face with no brains inside. Love a woman for her intelligence, not her beauty or how good she looks in a pair of jeans. Ladies, have a little respect for yourselves. Refuse to be judged for your pretty face. And if you're a true country girl, don't be stereotypical. Don't be the girl in the country song. Be sensible. Cut offs aren't always the proper clothing option.

Guys and gals alike, don't let the music industry's ideal affect your lifestyle. Don't look for love in the wrong places, and when you find it, love for reasons other than physical beauty. And for goodness sake, go listen to some classic country if you really want to experience country music.

 

This is the ideal that I try to live up to. And yes, my belt does have my name on it.

The Standard for a Forgotten Genre: A Review

In today's modern culture where classic literature is largely ignored, the literature that shaped the 18th and 19th centuries have been shelved at the back of the library, forgotten with no hope of rekindled interest. High school and college students may read a few classic pieces such as Shakespeare and Dickens, but beyond that, many popular works of the last few centuries are lost to time. Even as a History major, I only read a handful of classic pieces during my college career, and now one of my primary goals is to compensate for my lack of literary diversity.

In my mildly educated opinion, one of the greatest forgotten genres is Gothic romance. This isn't a single author who is lost to time, but a handful of authors who would have rivaled Stephanie Meyers, J.K. Rowling, and Suzanne Collins in their day. These were popular authors and popular books which the gentry would have raved about on Twitter and Facebook and written fan fiction about the plight of the heroine if the internet existed 200 years ago. But these authors lost their popularity with the passage of time, just like most modern authors will lose their esteem eventually, too. In fact, these authors have lost so much of their popularity that, while their novels are still in print, one can't easily walk into Barnes and Noble and pick up a copy of the book. The novel has to be special ordered, or ordered off Amazon. Two of my Gothic novels, including the one which this review will discuss, came from a stack of free books at my college's library. (I was going to see a professor directly after finding these, and expressed my excitement about finding the books for free, which I expected the professor to share my excitement, but only provoked a blank stare.) So as you see, the libraries don't even want to keep Gothic novels around, most likely to make room for more popular novels!

Not all Gothic novels have been forgotten. In fact, I would surmise that the vast majority of people have heard of individual novels before they have heard of the genre of Gothic romance. The overarching label of "Gothic literature" can be extended to include Frankenstein, Jane Eyre, Northanger Abbey, Wuthering Heights, and Dracula, and even Nathaniel Hawthorne and Edgar Allen Poe are even thrown into this genre occasionally. Everyone has heard of (most of) these novels, I am sure, if only because of film adaptations of the original novels. Modern film producers love to exploit Gothic literature because of the allure of the dark, haunting feeling of the mid-19th century. A primary example of this is the upcoming film produced by Guillermo del Toro, Crimson Peak, starring Tom Hiddleston, Charlie Hunnam, and Mia Wasikowska. (Del Toro actually described this movie as a "Gothic" romance, much to my excitement.)

With all these Gothic novels being adapted for film, why do I call Gothic romance a "forgotten genre"? Because the first Gothic novels, primarily the ones written in the 18th century, have been gathering dust as they sit on the shelves. So, since my life goal is to rebel against modern culture and trends, my most recent literary conquest was the first Gothic novel, The Castle of Otranto by Horace Walpole.

Before I delve into a discussion of Otranto, I want to define the elements that comprise Gothic novels. Gothic novels traditionally occur during the Medieval Era, although recently the Gothic label has increasingly described the Victorian Era. As a traditionalist, I consider a Medieval setting as a primary tenant of a Gothic novel, which excludes most 19th century authors from this genre. Gothic novels normally occur in a desolate castle, monastery, or similar setting, and includes supernatural elements and unexplained, mysterious occurrences, a villain intent on projecting his desires on those around him, an imprisoned heroine who receives the brunt of the villain's wrath, a hero who embodies the Medieval chivalric ideal and saves the heroine, and a romance between the hero and the heroine that will almost definitely be forbidden by the villain. So the basic elements are eerie castles, ghosts, oppressive men, distressed females, forbidden or lost love, and lots of violence.

Gothic novels are the equivalent of modern horror novels, with Medieval tones (chivalry, ghosts, monks, etc.) The Early Modern Era, the time period which Walpole, Radcliffe and Lewis lived, was a clash of the Medieval and Modern ideas. This transition period prompted revolutions in France, Britain, and America, and laid the pathway for the Industrial Revolution among other foundations in the modern world. Perhaps one of the greatest achievements of the Early Modern Era was the disillusionment of Medieval superstition, and authors such as Radcliffe in The Mysteries of Udolpho consciously strive to aid this disillusionment by explaining the supernatural occurrences.

The Castle of Otranto includes all the elements of oppression, romance, and supernatural occurrences discussed above. According to Walpole, a dream inspired him to write Otranto, and the novel was published in 1764. He published it, falsely, as an Medieval Italian novel written between the 12th and 13th centuries and printed in Italy in 1529 which was rediscovered, translated, and published. Walpole's style is straightforward; he is not descriptive about the characters or surroundings. He tells the story without embellishment. The only frustrating part of this book was Walpole's omission of paragraphs and quotation marks. Paragraphs may last for two or more pages, and the lack of quotation marks makes differentiating between speakers difficult.

The Castle of Otranto begins the morning ofthe marriage ceremony between Conrad, the heir of the Castle Otranto, and Isabella, the daughter of the Marquis of Vicenza. But Conrad never arrives at the altar; outside, he is crushed by an enormous helmet that fell from the sky. After Manfred, the Prince of Otranto, observes that his only son and heir has been killed, he remembers a prophecy stating "That the castle and lordship of Otranto should pass from the present family, whenever the real owner should be grown too large to inhabit it." (p.17) He plans to divorce his current wife, Hippolita, who has been barren for many years, and marry Isabella. When Isabella hears of Manfred's plans, she announces that she does not wish to marry him and flees from him. She is aided by a peasant boy as she escapes through a trap door and takes refuge at the church. Manfred finds the peasant boy, named Theodore, sentences him to death for helping Isabella escape, and locks him in one of the rooms in the castle. That evening, he talks with Matilda, the daughter of Manfred, through the open window and Matilda is smitten by the chivalric young man. As Theodore is about to be executed the following day, the local friar, Jerome, recognizes Theodore's birthmark and declares that Theodore is his son. Manfred forces Jerome to choose between his son and Isabella, but before he can decide, knights from another realm arrive and demand to see Isabella. The knights and Manfred race to go find Isabella and Matilda, meanwhile, frees Theodore. Theodore arrives to defend Isabella and wounds one of the knights. The wounded knight then reveals that he is Isabella's father. They rush back to the castle, where he begins to recover, and Frederic, Isabella's father, and Manfred agrees to Frederic's marriage to Matilda in exchange for his marriage to Isabella. Manfred begins to suspect that Isabella is consorting with Theodore, he sneaks into the church and stabs Matilda, who he thinks is Isabella. Shortly before Matilda dies, it is discovered that Theodore is the true heir of Otranto. Matilda's death fulfills the prophecy, and Manfred lives in sorrow for the rest of his life. Theodore takes the throne and marries Isabella because she is the only one who understands the loss of Matilda.

It is a melodramatic story with a somber ending, but Walpole drives home his point: the sins of the father affect the sins of the children. (p. 7) The wicked (Manfred) must pay for their sins, and the good (Theodore) will succeed. Walpole also introduced marriage for love in the romance between Theodore and Matilda. While they never married, they clearly wanted to, and in the end Theodore could only marry because Isabella understood his pain. But this notion of love was a new concept (compared to arranged marriages) and it is a concept that would gradually take hold more and more through the 19th century. Morally and romantically, it is a good story. But Walpole's success isn't in his morality or his literary style. Quite frankly, Walpole isn't very accurate. The only Medieval element is his portrayal of Theodore as a chivalric "knight in shining armor." The tale as a whole is clearly Early Modern. But he is a clever and skilled writer, so his historical inaccuracies (in a time before extensive historical scholarship and research) may be overlooked.

Walpole's success is what he created. Very few authors have the ability, let alone the creativity, to create an entirely new genre. Even fewer authors have the ability to create a genre with such a broad impact. Gothic novels were huge in the Regency Era, and many 19th century authors, such as Austen, were influenced heavily by Gothic novels. Before Walpole, nothing compared to this type of novel, and his novel set the tone -- the standard -- for future Gothic novels. He spawned an entirely new idea, an idea which still influences culture today.

So if you like horror or mystery novels and are looking for something a little different, I highly suggest delving into Gothic romance. While authors such as Walpole and Radcliffe are forgotten in most literary circles today, their works are just as much of classics as Austen, Bronte, and Dickens, and infinitely more original and clever than modern authors.

Walpole, Horace. The Castle of Otranto: A Gothic Story. Edited by W S. Lewis. Oxford World's Classics. Oxford England: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Procrastination

Every college student struggles with it. Don't deny it. Procrastination affects every student from time to time. For me, it was that horrid weekly paper for my Political Science class. It didn't have to be long, and the amount of time that it took to write was nothing compared to my History papers. But I hated them because my History professors drilled into my head to never put opinions into a paper, then my Political Science professor assigned papers where I had to state my opinion. So I'd procrastinate. Maybe I didn't procrastinate for very long; I normally had it done by the time I designated for it to be finished. But I procrastinated nonetheless.

I always thought of procrastination as a thing students do. College students notoriously procrastinate on their assignments. (And if you don't believe me, visit the library of any college campus at midnight on Sunday night and try to tell me again that people don't procrastinate.) I didn't party during college, but my best friend and I would stay up late at least once a week gossiping over people, classes, and men.

But I'm an adult now with bills to pay, a house to keep clean, and a schedule to keep track of. I've overcome that childish tendency to put off my duties!

Nope.

There's a large pile of dishes by the sink that hasn't been washed. Half the laundry has been folded, and assuming that I don't get distracted with something else, the rest will be folded before bedtime. Oh, and I should probably start dinner soon. The husband gets cranky if he isn't fed regularly.

In fact, writing this blog post about procrastination is actually me procrastinating. After three years of writing, editing, and re-writing, I've finally finished writing my novel. *Celebratory drinks all around.* And now I get to proofread all 84,000 words and make about 84,000 corrections. Perfectionists like me shouldn't write. I'll announce that I'm finally content with the end result sometime in the summer of 2017. So, now with the daunting task of proofreading thirty-eight chapters of Regency Era romance and intrigue lying before me, I'm procrastinating. I'm writing a blog post, playing games on my phone, and scrolling through my News Feed on Facebook.

The point that I'm making is that adults procrastinate too. Everyone, whether in a work, school, or home environment, has some task they dread. Right now, I'm dreading that file on my computer that keeps calling my name, and soon I think it's going to start screaming for attention. But I'm procrastinating by enjoying my moment of playing stupid games and writing pointless blog posts.

There are so many things that want my attention, and I know I can't ignore them forever. Especially the hungry husband... unlike the dishes and the laundry, he talks back.

They say that all good things must come to an end. Thus, my hour of procrastination has ended, and fortunately for you, reader, so has this pathetic blog post.

Fascism and the Eliminiation of Christianity: A Review

Ever since high school I've had a fascination with different ideological stances and the differences with my own beliefs. In my freshman year of college, my interests directed me in the direction of Marxism, probably due to my interest in Eastern European politics, and I wrote several papers accordingly. That passion dwindled over time as my interest in the 17th and 18th century grew, but politics, and, ever increasingly, economics still held my interest.

At a book sale in college, I picked up a copy of Modern Fascism: The Threat to the Judeo-Christian Worldview by Dr. Gene Edward Veith, Jr. I was vaguely aware of Dr. Veith, as his book The Spirituality of the Cross was required reading for one of my classes. Then, in premarital counseling, his book Family Vocation: God's Calling in Marriage, Parenting, and Childhood was also "required reading", though without the compulsory book review due at the end of the "course." I have since met Dr. Veith on two different occasions, and got him to sign each of these books. Aside from being an incredibly intelligent man on an academic basis, he is also a skilled writer with great knowledge about the faith that he confesses.

I was especially impressed with this book for several reasons, but mainly because it is much different than the other two books I have read by Dr. Veith. It is a large, but not unrelated, step from the doctrine of Vocation and Justification to Fascism. These books all have one thing in common: the Christian, and more specifically, the Confessional Lutheran worldview. Modern Fascism is different than the other two in that it addresses an opposing worldview which seeks to destroy the Christian worldview.

When I picked up this book a few weeks ago to begin reading it, I was intrigued by the subject mainly because Fascism isn't something that is talked about much today. Conservative news programs and authors squawk about the threat of Marxism, mainly because of its popularity within academia within the last few decades, and the consequential influence of that popularity, but the conversation is never turned to Fascism. After reading this book, though, I would argue that the threat of Fascism is just as great, if not greater, than the threat of Marxism.

When the term Fascism is thrown out, a person's thoughts automatically go to WWII when the Nazis sought to conquer their European neighbors. The Third Reich is the best large scale example of a Fascist state. For this reason, much of the book discusses Nazi history and policy. Veith begins, just like any good author, with a definition of Fascism:

Fascist totalitarianism was more than a system of political control; it was totalitarian in seeking to encompass and to direct all of life. Fascism emerged not only as a political and economic system but as a new religion, whose promise was to heal the alienation of the modern world. The emotional life would be freed, harmony with nature would be achieved, and the culture would be revitalized. (p.17)

 He quickly points out his thesis: Fascism is the opposition to Christianity. This becomes even more clear upon considering the motives behind the Holocaust and the destruction of the Church.

The book is divided into nine chapters, each discussing a different aspect of the Fascist ideology and expounding upon how Hitler implemented these tenets in the Third Reich. While the entire book is worthy of discussion, I will touch on the two parts which I found most interesting, ethics (abortion and euthanasia) and the "mass mind" (the media), because of how prominent they are in the modern world.

As I begin this analysis, I would like to point out a common misconception about where Fascism resides on the political spectrum. As a student of political science, I was taught that Fascism was placed on the far right of the spectrum. In fact, a more accurate placement is on the same level as Communism on the far left. Veith explains that this misconception originates from the Marxist declaration that Fascism is its "polar opposite." (26) They are different strains of the same thought (socialism), just taken in different directions. In the case of Fascism, that direction was nationalism.


Ethics

Nazi ethics, on the broader scale, is notorious. The Holocaust was certainly one of the most horrific events in all of history. But Veith points out that racism was not the only impetus behind the mass murder of "inferior races." Hitler targeted the Jews because of the heritage that rooted them in the Judeo-Christian tradition. Next he targeted Christians who would not conform to his ideology, most notably Lutheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer. In light of the Nazi ability to murder people because of their ethnicity and ideology, their views on abortion and euthanasia will not be astounding.

Hitler did not oppose abortion, if  you were racially inferior. For those of a superior racial background, he prohibited abortion. His means of growing the Nazi state was to tell young women that by producing children, possibly by multiple men of equally superior racial background, they were doing a service to the Third Reich. The marriage of Nazi officials had to be approved by the government to assure that their offspring would be genetically superior. But outside of the genetically superior exception, abortion was allowed. This caused Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, to toy with Fascism for a brief period. "Among the unfit, Sanger included those with mental problems, the handicapped, and poor people generally... she believed that crime and poverty can be eliminated simply by sterilizing the poorer classes." (108) Sanger found a kindred spirit with Hitler; she wished to eliminate many of the same people groups -- "blacks, Jews, Southern Europeans... and, in short, 'all non-aryan people.'" (108)

Likewise, euthanasia was common, oftentimes encouraged. The same people who Sanger wished to eliminate through abortion -- the handicapped, mentally retarded, etc, -- were eliminated. Veith tells stories of fathers begging for their child to be euthanized due to mental or physical handicaps. After a movie was released which portrayed a husband's struggle with his wife's terminal illness and subsequent decision to euthanize her, the vast populace agreed that he made the right decision. Some of the people were later horrified to find that this was occurring, but the vast majority did not oppose. The Nazis considered these handicapped and terminally ill people "life unworthy of life." Keeping in mind this mentality, the Holocaust is no longer so surprising. The Jews and other "inferior races" were unworthy of life, to the Nazis, and therefore killing them was doing the rest of the world a favor.


The Mass Mind

Hitler recognized the benefits of reaching the "mass mind" through the media. Veith remarks that "the Third Reich produced 1,363 films. Many were produced for sheer entertainment, with propaganda subtext..." (147) He continues:

The goal of Fascism was the creation of an organic, mass community. The power of images is that they unite diverse people into one. The individuals in a movie theater join in a common experience, feeling and responding as one.... Propaganda forged the people into a common will; it created the community. (148)

Hitler employed this tactic to achieve his plans for the people. Through the media and other means of influencing the masses, such as rallies, he won over the masses instead of the individual. He recognized the benefits of mob rule, and utilized it to his full advantage. This tactic was taken a step further by turning that mob to violence. By channeling anti-Judeo-Christian propaganda, the populace was effectively mobilized against them, thus gaining the population's support to massacre Jews and Christians.

* * *

The desire to be morally superior to other peoples, past and present, is in the forefront of the minds of most Americans. Of course, America would never kill millions of people because of their ethnicity or inability to adhere to the state ideology. An American president would never use violence as an end to a means. America isn't a Fascist state; it is not a totalitarian state. This post-modern world where everyone is accepted and a person's reality is truth would not allow such things to occur in America.

Or would it?

Certainly the American government does not imprison every non-Arian and sentence them to a life in a concentration camp, or death. The American populace is far too diverse for that. But that does not mean that people are not persecuted in today's society. Christians are targeted by the left; homosexuals are targeted by the right. Sinfulness aside, homosexuals are still human being who deserve respect, just like Christians. Should the life of either be lessened? There is a huge difference between disapproving of a person's lifestyle, and wishing death upon a person for their life choices. In an Islamic culture, which is oftentimes Fascist, the answer would be that both Christians and homosexuals are unworthy of life. This is evident in the genocide of Christians in the Middle East and Africa. But what about in American culture? Do Americans kill those who are different with their malice?

But what about the unborn child, especially an unborn child with defects or a mother who cannot financially care for the child? What does the world tell that mother to do? Just like the father who begged for his son to be euthanized so that he would not have to endure those hardships, the mother is encouraged to abort her baby because the child would have been born into a dire situation. The question that arises from that scenario is: does that child have the same right to life as the mother, or any other person on earth? Does Down Syndrome, or a cleft palate make that person less of a human with any less of a right to live? Nazi German would have said that the child did not deserve to live; what does modern America say?

What about the woman with a terminal or mental illness? If the husband opts to euthanize his wife, how will it change his life? And does he have the right to decide when his wife lives or dies? Despite her illness, she has the same right to live as her husband. This subject is just as divided as the abortion question, and just as controversial. Arguments for and against euthanasia, the question remains: does that person deserve to live?

I think most people will agree that the media is an outlet that is vigorously exploited in our highly technological society. In election years, especially, political propaganda in the form of ads and pamphlets abound. One can argue that this is just politics, but political rallies have the same affect for today's political candidates as they did for Hitler. They influence the mass mind; they target the group and through the experience they gain a foothold. Of course, the media does not just apply to politicians. Film, television and music producers slip their own "propaganda" or ideology into the production, thus planting ideas in the minds of the impressionable.

A glance at a list of current films reveals mostly action movies with lots of explosions, drama, and, of course, death. Modern music depicts violence in the form of death, physical abuse, and other wicked acts for a moral cause, vengeance, or even pure hatred. Children learn from technology (music, movies, etc) in the absence of a moral guide in the form of a parent. What should we expect from children, and even adults, when that is prominent in entertainment, and has been prominent for years? People have been desensitized to death and violence, thus devaluing human life. Furthermore, the inability to distinguish between reality and fiction encourages violent trends in society. When you feed a society murder and evil, how can you expect them to exhibit compassion and kindness?

The question in my mind which arises from all this is: where does the church stand? Practically every denomination, and sometimes individual congregations, will hold different ideas about ethics. Conservative denominations abhor abortion and euthanasia, where liberal denominations take the opposing stance. Fascist ideals have leaked into modern culture, and thus leaked into the church as well. Even the idea of the mass mind appeals to the church. Churches spewing questionable theology use the experience and the subsequent feelings of the individual to form a bond with the rest of the mass mind. One hears stories of pastors leading their flock to death, sin, or even questionable theology, for the same reasons the German people followed Hitler down an evil path. The masses are easily controlled by emotion and great promises. Not every religious fad leads to the same demise, but the tactic is the same and the opportunity is present.

Modern America is not prone to racism, Nationalism, or genocide (other than abortion) anytime soon, but this does not mean that she is immune to Fascism. Violence, the devaluation of human life, the media, an increasingly totalitarian government, and several other factors which I did not have the chance to discuss are crucial aspects of Fascism which Christians, and anybody who believes in morality and peace, should be wary of the increasing impact. I am not saying that all these traits are inherently Fascist, but together they can lead toward Fascism. Veith concludes the book with perhaps the most crushing sentences of the entire book: "Fascism is the modern world's nosalgia for paganism. It is a sophisticated culture's revolt against God." (p. 160) Fascism seeks not only to destroy Christianity, but to destroy what is good and positive, and replace it with death and evil.

I have done my best to remain objective by questioning modern society and how it views the same concepts that Fascist Germany employed. Knowingly, I have failed in this task. I am no expert on this subject and my knowledge is limited. If you have found my inadequate analysis insightful and interesting, I highly suggest reading Modern Fascism. I did not delve into many of the psychological and ideological points that Veith makes but I assure you that it is an excellent, enlightening read.

Veith, Gene Edward. Modern Fascism: The Threat to the Judeo-Christian Worldview. Concordia Scholarship Today. St. Louis: Concordia, 1993.

Move to Florida, they said.

Growing up in rural Maryland, I spent my whole naive childhood thinking that Florida was always warm and full of old people or drunk kids. Because that's the Florida stereotype, right? People think Florida and their mind goes to Disney, Key West, and spring break. Florida is where people go for vacation, to get drunk , and to retire.

So when my husband service selected aviation during our senior year of college, I was thrilled to be moving to Florida. I could care less about the beach, old people, and drunk kids, but I am always cold. So, in my rational way of thinking, I thought "Florida will be nice and warm and I'll never be cold again!"

I was never more wrong in my life.

First off, we live in the pan-handle. This isn't Orlando or Tampa or Key West. This is rural Florida. Milton is a bunch of good old boys with big trucks. We witnessed a lawn mower being pulled over by the cops yesterday. And didn't think anything of it. About thirty minutes west in Pensacola, they are a little more upscale, but it still isn't Orlando by far. Downtown Pensacola is actually classy, and there is a lot of culture surrounding the city.

Now, after that disclaimer, back to the weather. Florida isn't just hot. It's really freaking humid. I can take 90 degree weather, and enjoy it. But add 70%+ humidity into the mix and it isn't even close to enjoyable. You walk outside and immediately feel like you need to go take another shower. It's disgusting. Now repeat this scenario every day from April to October. Wait, no -- add one day a month with no humidity, just to mix things up.

Because of the extreme heat and humidity, everybody cranks the air conditioning to the max. Remember me? The one who is always cold? Yeah, I'm that person carrying a sweater around with me in the middle of summer because otherwise I'd be shivering. And then people wonder why I drink so much. Alcohol does wonders for warming a person up.

The only enjoyable result of the painful humidity is the thunderstorms. Almost every afternoon, there's a wicked rain storm, normally accompanied by thunder. It's normally quite glorious, and sometimes a little intense. Of course, this trend complicates taking the bike. Because even if the forecast is clear, this is Florida and anything can happen. And honestly, riding in the rain is the worst thing ever.

This is obviously from an occasion where it did not rain as we were riding.

Now, let's talk about "winter" in Florida. Somewhere around November, it starts getting a little cooler. Beginning of December, it's a little too cool to take the motorcycle out. This lasts until about the end of January, when riding season begins again. This is the only noticeable season change. But remember, it's Florida, so mother nature hates everyone. So, in those two months of "winter" where it does get below freezing on occasion, why not mix things up and have a "snow storm"? My husband and I attended college in New York and Wisconsin, respectively, so we know what snow storms really look like. Pensacola and the surrounding areas are basically connected by a series of bridges, and everyone know what happens when snow and bridges mix. The entire city practically shut down for a couple days. This is Florida... what does one do with snow?

The ground outside our old apartment in Pensacola, with a light dusting of snow.

Like I said, mother nature hates everyone.

The pan-handle has been fortunate enough to not be effected by any hurricanes yet this year (knock on wood) but everyone says that we're due for another big hurricane to hit the area. Hurricanes are a big thing for the Navy. Like, they'll fly flight students out of the area if a hurricane is going to hit. They throw dependents under the bus, but rest assured that I'll be packing up the Bernina, the cat, and a bottle of bourbon to head north for a couple days.

Moving on to a subject other than the weather, the absolute worst thing about Florida is the bugs. They are everywhere, and in large quantities. Since we live in the country, we get an unusual amount of bugs. In the first week we moved into our house, we killed two huge spiders, which my husband thought were brown recluse. I'll just say that neither of us like bugs and it didn't take us long to get pest control to come. We have a nice patio on the back of our house, but between the bugs, the humidity, and the fact that the back of the house faces the west, we don't get to utilize that patio very frequently. It's a sad fact of living in Florida. If you're visiting Florida, bring boots and fly swatters to address the bug problem.

The view from our back patio on the one occasion we could actually sit outside.

Lastly, I can't help but address the problem of Florida drivers. I'm not sure why but nobody in this state knows how to accelerate or gauge another driver's speed. Oh, and apparently Florida cars don't come with turn signals. Who knew. Here is an example of why I get road rage, and, consequently, why my husband normally drives. I was doing between 55 and 60 down the road, and a Town Car pulls out in front of me about 50 yards ahead of me. When one is going 55 mph, 50 yards isn't much time to brake. And then, the woman doesn't accelerate. At all. By this time I'm having to slam on the brakes in order to avoid a collision. She was turning at the next road about another 50 yards down the road, but she didn't signal until she was now stopping in front of me. And she looked traumatized when I blew the horn. This is a daily occurrence when driving in Florida. So a word to the wise: learn to judge the speed of oncoming traffic and signal if you're turning. You might prevent that oncoming car from hitting you.
 
So if you can get past the weather, the bugs, and the idiot drivers, Florida isn't a bad state. Of course, I only speak for the pan-handle, which is more like southern Alabama, but that's beside the point. The people are pretty nice, even if they can't drive, and there are about two weeks of enjoyable weather where you can have the windows open. The concert scene is surprisingly good in the Pensacola area, the restaurants are great, and the beaches are lovely.

My point is that Florida is a glorious place to visit, but living here isn't half as enjoyable as visiting. But seriously, who wouldn't die for that view every day.

The Pensacola pier.

Liberty, Equality, Fraternity... or Death: A Review

Sometime between the end of high school and the beginning of college, I got into the habit of reading an Austen novel every winter and a Dickens novel every summer. I've finished all of Austen (except her short stories, which I am still working through) but I still have quite a few Dickens novels to finish.

This summer I chose A Tale of Two Cities, mainly because my copy is small and would be easier to move than a hardcover novel (Navy problems.) Normally I choose the novel according to the most recent BBC adaptation. For example, summer before last I read Great Expectations since two adaptations were coming out in the same year. Beforehand, I read Bleak House and Little Dorrit so that I could watch the lengthy seven hour adaptations which BBC masterfully produced. Unfortunately, there are no recent adaptations of A Tale of Two Cities, and no adaptations on Netflix.

A Tale of Two Cities takes place between London and Paris during the late 18th century. The novel is divided into three parts: Part One mainly occurs in pre-Revolution Paris; Part Two mainly takes place in London; and Part Three unfolds in Paris at the height of the French Revolution. All the main characters have connections with both cities, which is a major driving force behind the novel.

The novel begins when a banker named Mr. Lorry accompanies Lucie Manette to Paris to retrieve her father, a doctor who spent twenty years in the Bastille. Upon retrieving him and bringing him back to London, Doctor Manette regains his sanity. Through different means they meet Sydney Carton and Charles Darnay, and quickly it becomes clear that both men are in love with Lucie. Lucie marries Darnay, and on their wedding day he tells Doctor Manette the secrets of his past. Here, the novel skips forward a few years. Darnay receives a letter from a friend in France who has been imprisoned, and Darnay embarks on a rescue mission to France. Before making it to Paris, he is imprisoned when it is discovered that he is the heir of a French nobleman. Lucie and Doctor Manette come to Paris as soon as they hear word of Darnay's imprisonment, and after a year a trial proceeds where Doctor Manette convinces the jury of Darnay's innocence. Darnay is released, but is later taken into custody again at the urges of Monsieur and Madame Defarge, two leaders in the Revolution. At the second trial, Monsieur Defarge produces a letter written by Doctor Manette during his imprisonment in the Bastille which identifies Darnay's family as the instigators behind the Doctor's unfair imprisonment. Darnay is sentenced to the guillotine the following day. Sydney Carton arrives in Paris and, displaying his love for Lucie, sneaks Darnay out of the prison and takes his place at the guillotine, allowing Lucie and Darnay to escape from France.

It is a morbid ending to an equally dark novel, but in that way Dickens captures the essence of the French Revolution. He incorporates those Romantic elements which are prominent throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, especially in Gothic novels, and creates a terrifying tale of a period of bloodshed. The dismal, hopelessness experienced by Lucie and Darnay is similar to Emily's struggle in The Mysteries of Udolpho as she attempts to escape from the Castle Udolpho. While Dickens does not address elements such as the supernatural like are found in Gothic novels, the elements of death, hopelessness, imprisonment, terror, and a wicked villain are all driving forces behind Gothic novels.

Dickens is writing about seventy years after the beginning of the Revolution. The equivalent would be someone today writing about World War II. While he was not alive during this time and he did not have the advantage of extensive academic research, there were still people alive who lived through it, people who's families were affected by it, just like today the effects of World War II are still felt in small ways.

Dickens points out several aspects of the French Revolution which are sometimes overlooked by high school history classes, and even college history classes. History books focus on the annihilation of the French aristocracy: the deaths of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette, the murder of countless French nobles, and the pillage of French chateaus across the country. But Dickens reveals the depth of the wickedness of the French Revolution: death did not stop at the nobility.

One of the initial chapters of the novel portrays a cask of wine from the Defarge's wine shop breaking open on the streets, and the peasants flocking to scoop up the wine in any way possible. But, the street is stained red. Dickens continues this symbolism later in the book when the Revolution begins, as the streets are stained red with blood at the hands of Monsieur and Madame Defarge. Monsieur Defarge becomes one of the primary judges at the trials of the prisoners, at which Madame Defarge manipulates the outcome through her husband.

The tragic loss of life experienced during the French Revolution was expedited by the guillotine. And such a machine did not differentiate between male or female, rich or poor.

Lovely girls; bright women, brown-haired, black-haired, and gray; youths; stalwart men and old; gentle born and peasant born; all red wine for La Guillotine, all daily brought into light from the dark cellars of the loathsome prisons, and carried to her through the street to slake her devouring thirst. Liberty, equality, fraternity, or death -- the last, much the easiest to bestow, O Guillotine! (p.278)

How powerful are those words! Liberty, equality, fraternity, or death! Dickens' clever adaptation of the slogan of the French Revolution brings to light the true power of the Revolution. While the nobility was certainly the primary target, the peasantry did not escape suspicion. An act of treason could be conjectured at any point. Despite the fact that Darnay had renounced his family and his title because of his opposition to their treatment of the peasantry, Madame Defarge still demanded his death due to his association with the nobility. The frail seamstress who befriends Sydney Carton as they proceed to the guillotine was accused of "plots". Each day became a competition to see how many prisoners would be executed in a day, where the true Revolutionaries craved a higher death toll the following day. And just like the wine cask, the peasants could not shed enough blood to quench their thirst.

Despite the darkness of the novel, Dickens does end with one ray of light. The death of Sydney Carton allows Charles Darnay to safely escape France with his wife, child, and father-in-law. Sydney, who is not always positively displayed in the novel, sacrifices himself  for Lucie's happiness. He repeats a scripture passage as he approaches the guillotine, and it is clear that he is at peace with his fate. Despite his shortcomings, he dies for love and he dies in peace.

Dickens is often described as a genius, and this novel has been acclaimed as one of the best fictional works about the French Revolution. I can't argue with either of those assertions. He accurately demonstrates the blood lust which brought down the ancien régime, and sets the background for nearly a century of socio-political anarchy in France. A background that was rooted in the unfortunate ideals of liberty, equality, fraternity, or death.

Being a housewife isn't a job, right?

I've always dreaded dinners with people that I don't know well. It isn't that my conversation skills are lacking, or that I am an overly shy person. But there's one question that I hate answering: "what do you do?" I respond simply that I'm a housewife, and quickly turn the conversation back to my guests. I am not ashamed that I don't have a career other than being a wife, but I've always felt like people look down on me for not doing more with my life.

I graduated in December 2012 with a degree in European History. I was at the top of my class. I graduated a semester early because I took 18 credits a semester and pushed myself to the limit. I was one class short of a double major. I would have gone to grad school if I'd never met my husband, but I was fortunate enough to marry a man who loves me enough to let me choose whether I want to work or not. Without sounding too pompous, I'm a fairly intelligent person, and I like to think that is evident in my conversation.

Most people are too courteous to question my decision to be a housewife, but in nearly every case the looks I get ask: "Don't you want to do more with your life?"

My simple answer is no.

Just because I don't get up at 6:30 every morning, get ready, and rush out the door to get to work on time doesn't mean that I don't "work". I clean the house, do the dishes, fix dinner, and run errands. This allows my husband to come home to a house that is (normally) clean and a home-cooked meal. He can focus more on his work instead of fretting about having clean socks and lunch meat for the next day.

Being at home every day allows me personal growth, too. I read, write, play the piano, and sew. In the last few months, I've made six charity quilts, with another in progress. This does not include other projects that I have completed for myself, family, and friends. I helped with Vacation Bible School last week and attended a seminar at church the week before, both opportunities that would have been more challenging if I worked outside of the home. This is just a short list, which I could expound upon for at least another paragraph.

I can also focus more on my husband's needs. Part of marriage is recognizing your spouse's needs and doing your best to accommodate them. While he's in aviation training, he spends most of the day and evening studying. So by fixing him dinner and doing the laundry, I'm doing the only thing I can to help him through flight school. Staying home also allows me to spend what little time I can with him, according to his schedule, without distracting him too much from his studies.

I could go on for hours about the benefits to not working, but my point is this: I am doing plenty with my life. What is more important than helping my best friend and husband in what he needs? Helping at church? Cooking for the flight students who are having a study session in our living room? Not working outside the home opens up numerous possibilities -- possibilities which I'm incredibly grateful to have. I have the chance to help other people, to make their lives easier, and to perform my vocation as a wife and friend.

I won't say that there aren't negative aspects to being a housewife. Our income is limited to an officer's salary, which means watching our finances and limiting our spending. My friendships are limited to church friends and my husband's Navy friends, since I don't have work relationships to cultivate. And I don't have the deadlines that I would have had in grad school that would have forced me to heighten my knowledge through research and lecture.

So next time you meet a housewife, don't judge her for not doing more with her life. She has chosen a career just like you have. She is serving her family so that their lives are more comfortable and enjoyable. She is impacting the world just as much as you by raising her children to be respectful, intelligent people. She is sacrificing herself and her desire for the people that she loves.

And honestly, I think I have the best job in the world.