Query: Hop Warrior, by Christine B

June 6th, 2009

Hi all,

So I ran into Jenner today and we were reflecting back on the course and how it was such a great learning experience. We were also wondering how everyone was doing with their stories and whether anyone was still reading the blog. Anyways, I’ve decided to pitch my query to The Walrus and see what happens. Here it is. Comments are welcome!

I’m in a stuffy warehouse in Moncton on a sunny day in May. My shoes are soaked with beer washing onto the concrete floor, and my ears ring with the clink of glass and hiss of machinery as men shout to be heard over the noise. Every so often, there’s the shatter of glass as a bottle breaks in machine behind me with a crooked “Save the Ales” sticker slapped onto it. At one end of the warehouse, bottles are being capped, labeled and boxed, then loaded into a truck that’s headed for Alberta tomorrow. At the other end, a man wearing a forest green shirt and baseball cap, with multiple ear piercings, a studded leather belt and lime green glasses climbs up steep metal stairs. Lifting the lid of a large stainless steel vat labeled “Mash Tun,” he peers inside its steaming depths, then runs back down and lopes over the tangle of red hoses on the floor to a counter screwed into the wall where he make notes in a binder. Turning around, he gives the finger to a man loading empty bottles onto a conveyer belt, then chuckles. This is Greg Nash, head brewer for Pump House brewery, winner of the 2007 Canadian Beer of the Year award and the bad boy of Canadian brewing.
“They’re bottling fucking Cadian and fucking assberry, err I mean blueberry today. None of those are really worth drinking,” jokes Nash, who is well known for his tendency toward extreme beers. Today he’s brewing Pump House’s Special Old Bitter, which has just started to be sold in six packs across the country. “I wish I could make it as hoppy as I wanted to,” he says, waving his arms in frustration. My fiancé, a home brewer and one of Nash’s biggest fans, has also joined us and is thrilled that Greg has offered to send him a recipe for “the craziest fucking hop bomb.” A former home brewer turned pro, Nash is well known among beer geeks in the Maritimes, with whom he freely exchanges his knowledge and experience. “We’re helping change the fucking face of brewing in Canada. More people making great beer means more people will be turned on to craft beer,” is his answer to critics who say he shouldn’t be sharing trade secrets. “Brewers making bad beer hurt my business,”
Nash’s brewing career started at the age of 15, with bottles exploding under his bed in his parents’ home outside Amherst, Nova Scotia. Although not much would have been available to an under-age drinker, there was also very little available to home brewers other than tinned kits sold in the local grocery stores. The results were mostly sugary beers that tasted like cider and weren’t very drinkable, although they did offer a temporary solution to Nash’s supply problem.
A self-confessed rebellious teenager, always in trouble with the law, Nash dropped out of high school and spent most of the next 15 years working as a car painter and on his parents’ blueberry and Christmas tree farm, all the while continuing to experiment with home brewing. Still not satisfied with the beer he was turning out from the tins, he ordered a copy of Charlie Papazian’s Complete Joy of Home Brewing and later started a local home brew club. Over the course of 600 batches, many of them botched and with the occasional exploding bottle, he discovered he wanted to turn brewing into more than a hobby. He returned to night school at the age of 31 to complete his high school diploma and qualify for admission to American Brewers Guild in Davis, California, then worked for two years at a small microbrewery and brew pub in Green Bay, Wisconsin.
When he returned to Canada in 1998 to brew for the River City Brewing Company in Winnipeg, Nash says he was slapped in the face by how different the beer scene was. Like so many other things, Canada’s craft brew scene is the smaller, gentler version of its American counterpart, where extreme brewing is now the norm. Up until a decade ago, most Canadian beer aficionados had to look south of the border if they wanted anything similar to a West Coast Style IPA. Whereas there are currently more than 1,400 craft breweries in the U.S. producing more than 1,600 India Pale Ales, at last count there were only about 150 small breweries across Canada that account for approximately five percent of the beer market. This makes for a highly competitive market where brewers are reluctant to exchange trade secrets. But much like the increased popularity of the local food scene, craft brewing in Canada is on an increasingly rapid boil, with a growing clientele of drinkers who would rather buy from the little guy down the street rather than commercial breweries.
Greg Nash is now a household name among craft brewers across the country, and he is credited with bringing hoppy West Coast beers to the Maritimes, where light beers like Ten-Penny Ale and Moosehead used to be standard fare. In the last decade, he has worked in three of the region’s main craft breweries – Propeller, Garrison and now Pump House – and has developed a following of beer geeks loyal to his brew.
Nash approaches brewing like any good chef approaches a recipe, and calls beer “the new wine.” He is on an infinite quest to create the perfect double IPA/aka “hop bomb” (his iPhone name is “iHopBombPhone”), and he has come close a few times. He continues to push the envelope wherever he brews, which can occasionally create conflict with owners who want to keep their beers more marketable and would rather produce tamer beers. Yet Nash is still optimistic that there is currently a revolution happening in the Canadian craft brew scene.
I’ll admit it: I’m more of a wine girl than a beer drinker, but for the last two months I’ve been immersed in the strangely compelling world of Canada’s microbrew scene. I’d like to propose a 4,000-word profile of Greg Nash in The Walrus, both because he is a colourful and interesting character and because his story offers a window into Canada’s burgeoning craft brewing scene. We’re still five to 10 years behind the scene in the States, which is why it makes it even more interesting. There are a number of extenuating circumstances restricting the growth of craft brewing that I’d like to explore, including Canada’s liquor laws and the management of its liquor stores. I plan to follow Nash’s success at the 2009 Canadian Brewing Awards in September, where he intends to enter three beers.
I’ve spent several hours interviewing Greg Nash, along with local beer geeks, former colleagues, his mother, certified beer judges, the editor of Taps magazine and organizers of the Canadian Brewing Awards. I am also familiar with the local craft brewing scene in Halifax, now that my laundry room has been overtaken by bubbling carboys and the citrusy aromas of hoppy IPAs brewed by my fiancé. I recently took an advanced narrative nonfiction course with Stephen Kimber of King’s College’s Journalism program, and have also completed Ryerson’s Certificate in Magazine Publishing, where I studied with David Hayes. During my “day job,” I work as the editor of the Nature Conservancy of Canada.
My writing has been published in ON Nature magazine, The Coast and The Toronto Colourguide, among other publications. I include some clippings of my formerly published work for your perusal, and would be happy to discuss this idea further with you and how I feel it fits with The Walrus’s audience.
Thank you in advance for your attention to my query. I look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Christine Beevis
cbeevis@eastlink.ca
h: 902-406-2110 w:902-480-3238
PS – I should add that I also have a connection to a good portrait photographer in Halifax who would be willing to photograph Nash in action, should you be interested. Samples of his work can be found here: http://www.andrewmurphy.ca/

Journal #5 By Ivan

April 16th, 2009

Reading through Baghdad Without A Map brought all the stories my Lebanese friends in Toronto used to tell me to life from the eyes of Tony Horowitz. What captured my attention most in this story was the way he constructed his quotes from the people on board the ferryboat and in Eastern Beirut. It was all constructed very naturally as if he had the time to take precise notes while shells flew over the two boats he was on. I suppose that when you’re in a situation like that, you’ll remember every single detail vividly whether you want to or not. I felt the bravery of the Lebanese, and their willingness to go back to their country under dire circumstances, was portrayed accurately in this story.
The frank attitude towards death from the characters in Horowitz’s story stuck in my mind. This attitude provided a glimpse into the strange apathy towards war some people develop through adolescence. In the story, Marwan, the person who convinced Horowitz to leave the ferry, was the example of this attitude. In terms of technique, I like how Horowitz repeated the small detail of Marwan’s clattering beads. The beads made for a marker of sorts, that kept the reader focused on the exact moment in the story with an ironclad grip, never allowing him or her to drift away.
Landing from the Sky was an interesting story detailing the rapid rise and fall that comes with the territory of the drug trade. Adrian Nicole LeBlanc was able to capture a different angle to how this story would be covered, the obvious angle being centering the story on Boy George himself. It was interesting to see the parallels in Jessica and Serena’s lives, and the patterns of disappearance that Jessica mimicked from when her own mother, Lourdes, raised her.
This story gave the reader a first hand view of the horror in the South Bronx in the late 1980s and how easy it was for young women like Jessica to dream of being “rescued” by another man, as opposed to getting an education. It is the first time I’ve read a story that was written to help the reader understand the situation in places like this on human terms, as opposed to resorting to the stereotypical portrayal often found in movies. The amount of interviewing Leblanc did for this story was tremendous and it must have taken a lot of time for her to cultivate the relationship necessary with Jessica’s family in order to be able to write a story like this.

Journal #4 By Ivan

April 16th, 2009

Roy Peter Clark’s story on the Morse family provides an interesting perspective into the mind of a woman who finds out her marriage and her life is not what she thought it was. Throughout the reading, I couldn’t help thinking how she could have not noticed the subtle signs in Mick’s character that revealed another aspect to his personality. Perhaps she noticed, but refused to take action because of the life he had given her. Perhaps it was the influence of religion that comforted her and made her think his lack of passion was a normal thing. Either way, the story held my interest up until about chapter five or six when I felt needless background information was thrown in. I think this story could have hit much harder if it was considerably shortened and certain background details about the family were taken out. Then again, I didn’t read past chapter ten so maybe it gets better.
Keegstra’s Children brought back memories of grade 12 law class where I first heard about this story. Robert Mason Lee was successful in showing the powers of persuasion and how easy the mind can be molded during the teenage years in this story. The answers he was able to get from the children in Keegstra’s class were creepy because the quotes made it clear that these kids either still believed what he taught them, or were skeptical of his views but did not dismiss them. The story started off in a very clever manner, with Lee detailing the daily events of a teenage girl and contrasting those events in between paragraphs with the outrageously warped answers she wrote on Keegstra’s exams. It’s amazing how in spite of everything that happened to Keegstra, many of his students and their parents still stood by his conspiracy theories. This story shows that humans can drift directly towards the fantastical and implausible if persuaded correctly. It’s frightening to think how malleable the human mind can be in a closed environment like Eckville if Keegstra was able to accomplish the spread of his ridiculous conspiracy theory to this degree.
The Boy Behind the Mask provides a personal glimpse into Sam’s life for the reader. It is obvious that a tremendous amount of inner strength is necessary in order to live Sam’s life but this story put that amount into perspective with the description of what he has to go through everyday. I like that the story was written simply without the creative liberty that some writers take. I think this was necessary in a story like this where the character is so extraordinary, the author had no need to do anything else except let the story tell itself. I thought the most powerful moment in the story was when three-year-old Sam ran by the full length mirror in the hallway and started crying when he saw himself in the mirror. This is a defining moment in Sam’s life and Tom Hallman painted that picture well. The way Hallman used “the boy” in some parts of the story instead of Sam’s name universalized the story for me because instead of thinking of him as an individual with an unfortunate condition, I was thinking of his condition as something that could happen to anyone and how I would deal with that personally in his situation.

Journal #3 by Ivan

April 16th, 2009

The readings this week were human tales of pure anguish, which made it difficult to read through them at times. Tom French’s story on the Rogers family was done with the perfect amount of sensitivity necessary to tell a story of this magnitude. I imagine it must be one of the hardest things in the world to tell a story like this when a whole family has been decimated by such a tragic event. It must be incredibly difficult to go about the task of depicting each character in the most truthful manner possible while keeping in mind that there is a grieving family who will read your story. How do you portray someone’s deceased daughter or wife accurately in a few thousand words in a story that will be scrutinized most by the people who knew the deceased best? Maybe those people will never read the story, dismissing it as another part of the media spotlight grief tends to shy away from. Or maybe they’ll appreciate a story like this; a story that humanizes the event and sets itself apart from your average dose of daily hard news written in a “sound bite approach” as Barry Siegel puts it. This is something I thought about a lot as I tried to put myself in French’s position and imagine having to write a similar story.
What made French’s story powerful for me was a feeling of knowing the people that died. This was due to the way he began the story with full detail of the Rogers’ lives, which signifies that he must have done a lot of difficult, emotional interviews with those close to the Rogers. The way he described Michelle’s rape by her uncle so carefully without getting into too much unnecessary detail was a testament to French’s craftsmanship. The description of the “essential piece” missing inside her kept in a room “under glass” stuck with me, as did the polarized description of her eyes as “both playful and haunting.” These minor details are what bring out the emotion in a reader and French did this very well.
Teresa Carpenter’s Death of a Playmate was an interesting story, but I didn’t notice anything particularly special about the writing. I found the actual story more intriguing and the ways in which the misplaced desire for fame and glamour crept its way into Paul Snider’s heart. I found nothing as human and I guess kind of charming in the writing as I did in French and Siegel’s pieces. It was too much Hollywood for me and I don’t particularly like reading about the excesses in the lives of famous people.
A Father’s Pain was written so well I’m sure every reader felt some sort of pain, or at least raw sympathy, when going through it. Again, the skillful construction of the character of Paul Wayment was what gave this story its emotional power, just like how French constructed the Rogers family. His deep connection to nature and the subsequent consequence made it easy to see that Gage’s death was a simple accident and at the same time something that a human being would have a very hard time reconciling with in that situation. I liked how he included the element of religion into the story and detailed Judge Hilder’s disenchantment with a black and white way of looking at things and then acknowledging them as the only answer sometimes. This allows the reader to realize that no one, not even a judge, really knows the answers to the questions in this world.

Journal 3 - Christie Conway

April 5th, 2009

Journal 3
Christie Conway

Tom French’s “Angels and Demons” has been my favourite reading to date. I don’t necessarily think French is the best writer or even that the story is crafted in a particularly new or original way – one need only look to Dateline or 20/20 to see what cues French is taking in terms of cliff-hangers and foreshadowing – however, news magazine shows are a guilty pleasure of mine and subsequently I couldn’t put this story down. I read well beyond the required chapters because I had to know who killed Jo, Michelle and Christe.

I should probably out myself now as someone who is fascinated by true crime stories. Cold Case File, The First 48, and all those ‘based on a true story’ movies about serial killers are a large part of my entertainment diet. As a young, morbid teenager, I dreamed of one day applying for the forensic profiling program with the FBI. Or at least I did before I realized the FBI has mandatory fitness testing. Surprisingly, gym class was never my thing. Again, this interest in the perverse might all stem back to me just being a bad person or perhaps having some unresolved childhood issues that I’ve repressed. Still, I love reading and watching this stuff, and what is more, I am not alone.

In Cold Blood – the first true crime novel of its kind, written by Truman Capote, became a huge best seller and even fictional shows like Law and Order or CSI still get top ratings today. I guess it’s just the public’s same old fascination with all things that go bump in the night – the ‘if it bleeds it leads’ mentality. A writer like French knows this. As a result, the writing doesn’t have to be fantastic. The writing is strong, but my point is that it doesn’t have to carry the piece; the heinous details of the case do that. Rather, French just needs to keep us reading, keep us turning the page, which he does quite well. However, as several of my classmates pointed out quite aptly, this device becomes evident very quickly. One can almost here the voice of Stone Phillips reading off the line “They would not see the sun again” at the end of an early section. Despite the dramatic cliffhangers and dark foreshadowing that rightfully annoyed the more refined literary palettes in the class, I still read faithfully until the last page.

I’m realizing now that in the last few postings I sound, perhaps, overly positive, or at least, not as critical as I could be about the readings I discuss in my responses. For the record, that is because I tend only to write about the things I absolutely love or completely despise and have of late, really enjoyed the readings. However, for this same reason, “Death of a Playmate” will not get much attention in this response. It was okay. It was like oatmeal. And not the awesome Quaker kind that comes in a variety of delicious sugary flavors, but like the kind your spinster aunt makes you as a child – devoid of flavor but offering basic nutrition.

Hey you! Go to Site Admin!

April 5th, 2009

How come nobody ever logs in to Site Admin to approve my comments? Am I really that unpopular?

Journal 2 - Christie Conway

April 5th, 2009

Journal 2
Christie Conway

Disaster journalism – great fodder for stories, but a tricky balancing act between compassion, truthfulness and readability.

I loved Michael Paterniti’s “Long Fall of 111 Heavy.” While some of my classmates seemed to have difficulty with Paterniti’s choice to use titles rather than names I did not find that it took away from the story. When dealing with disaster I believe that the strongest connection made with the reader is always based on the universal elements of the human condition: fear, anger, grief, loss. Paterniti conveys all of these emotions, and by keeping the victims of the crash and of the people left behind nameless, he creates possibility in the mind of the reader and fosters compassion based on empathy. It could have been my daughter, my husband, my friend.

While I not much for overly descriptive language, I did enjoy his prose style. It verges on the poetic and while sometimes crossing the line into the mellow-dramatic his metaphors are often poignant and memorable such as the image of the green light of the lighthouse over the green sea or the island jutting out of the water like a pod of whales. Paterniti also refrains from using quotation marks, a choice I believe points to his large aim as a storyteller. He seems to be distancing himself from the mundane details – the exact quotes, the names of his subjects. Instead, Paterniti focuses on other details, the kind of details that paint a picture with a broader stroke. It didn’t work for everyone, but it really worked for me.
I also enjoyed the inclusion of Flight 111. The two works offered an interesting juxtaposition of progressive and traditional narrative prose writing. Flight 111 contextualized Paterniti’s piece and offered more information about some of the more interesting character’s in Paternitit’s story such as the reporter and the coroner.

The only story I took issue with this week was Sean Flynn’s “The Perfect Fire.” While his description of the scenes dealing with the fire itself kept me reading, the individual stories of the firefighters were too similar and I often had to resist the urge to skim. Now, it could be that I’m just a bad person, but after I realized that all the firefighter’s stories I was reading weren’t going to make it, I felt as if I had been coerced into reading a very long, very repetitive eulogy. Again, I may just be a bad person.

Overall, the readings this week were strong and offered some interesting food for thought for both of writing and reporting emotionally charged pieces like disaster stories. Just as Christina mentioned in her journal for this week, these stories bring up the ethical issue of how to tactfully get your story from shocked and grieving family members and friends and if it is really possible to distance yourself from any story enough to, as Roger says in Flight 111, look, see and then “look away.”

Journal 1 - Christie Conway

April 5th, 2009

Journal 1
Christie Conway

Obviously I am submitting so late it is laughable. Except I’m not laughing. I’m terrified about my lack of ability as a self-starter (a term I’ve picked up and thought a lot about recently after completing several job applications around town). I need deadlines. But more than that I need consequences for missed deadlines – some omnipotent presence to reign down punishment, guilt trips, fire and brimstone or maybe just one of those super effective ‘I’m not mad, I’m just disappointed’ looks to help get my ass in gear. Clearly, I am a child in an adult’s body – someone who needs structure. Do they have Nanny 911 for twenty-two year olds? Maybe after graduation I’ll pitch it to Fox. In all seriousness though, I apologize for letting these journals fall to the wayside this semester. And maybe in the vein of child like avoidance, and because I love a shameless segue, I’ll start with Susan Orlean’s “The American Man at Age 10.”

Orlean’s piece is the kind of story I will always stop to read. More than the other readings this week, her story immediately caught my attention. Heavy weight champion boxer/convict/possible rapist narrative? Meh . . . not really my thing. Crazy activist cuts down really old, really rare tree? Interesting and well written but if it wasn’t assigned I would have kept flipping after the first page. A day in the life of a ten your old boy – I’m sold. It’s relatable while also being an excellent example of a good writer taking the everyday and making it fascinating. While I personally have never been an American 10-year old boy, I do know a few from spending my summers lifeguarding at a community pool in Pennsylvania and Orlean’s gets it spot on. The premise is simple enough, Orlean’s piece offers Colin up as an example of a kind of universal American experience of boyhood, but also, and perhaps more interestingly, as a litmus test for the national consciousness at age 10. If we, as readers, are reminded of anything during this playful, if nostalgic, read it’s that children are hyper aware of their surroundings; they’re brains acting like sponges soaking up everything around them from history lessons in the classroom, to sports stats with friends, and countless references from popular culture. Orlean subtly reminds the reader that what might seem like the mundane or trivial experiences of childhood are fundamental moments in shaping the adult psyche of Colin and his young friends.

After “The American Man at Age 10” C.J. Chivers’ “The School” is more than a little jarring by comparison. I tended to agree with Ivan when he discussed the cinematic nature of the text in class. Chivers crafts scenes of potboiler intensity. His sentences are short and his language that of action and his descriptions visceral though brief. One wonders if he ever dabbled in script writing. I personally found his device of sectioning off this piece with time and place particularly effective, and again added to the cinematic feel of the story.

Both pieces, though very different, appealed to my diverging ideas of readership. Chivers kept me turning pages. Orlean, though less intense, has kept me thinking about the larger implications of her story and wondering about what became of Colin. Looks like I’ll be picking up “The American Man at Age 20.” My only hope is that there is a female equivalent out there somewhere and that it isn’t, as it seems there are a disproportionate number circulating, one of those depressing versions of girlhood that involves only teasing, infighting, and eating disorders. Without getting into a rant it has always seemed to me that boyhood can be presented as unquestionably wholesome or at the very least, appropriately (acceptably) rough and tumble. Girlhood on the other hand seems to be synonymous with victimhood. Just a thought.

POETRY-prizings-writing-finds

April 1st, 2009

POETRY-prizings-writing-finds

Moira

this: (once you get toward the end it turns into muttering)

 

“Hello?” She breathed into the phone, her faux-high-pitched telemarketer receiving voice in place, chirping into the phone. The caller-id flashed  an out of province number, 516 and she wanted to be prepared just in case she needed to say “No, my mother isn’t home right now.” 

 

She started with disbelief, “I won?” 

“You won.”

“Really?” The conversation when much live this, with the CBC woman patient on the other end, doting a few nice remarks on her poems, but continually replying “Really, You won.” Before this moment Sue Goyette had been moments away from dismissing this phone call as a telemarketer, abandoning her identity in hopes of a quick disconnect, but instead found herself on the receiving end of ‘congratulations’.  Found herself accepting, or rather receiving,  the CBC Literary Prize for Poetry. 

She gawked. Musing on the idea that maybe her sister was behind this. Her middle-little sister. The one who has been reading her journals since they were little, giving them her own reviews;  Great! But uses the word “horses” one too many times– says New York Review of Books. This was definitely something she would conjure up, all in good fun of course. It was only after hanging up the white-cordless, the phone that never reached more than ten feet away from its base, that she remembered what the woman had said. “You can’t tell anyone.” She had been adamant on that point. Now this would be complicated, it was like putting a firework down her throat and telling her not to explode. 

“What was that about?” Her husband asked.

“I won.” was all she said. Maybe she would tell only a few people. But then not telling would mean no drinks, or only one, at events just so the news wouldn’t force itself out. It was two months until it would be announced, how could you keep a secret so brilliant trapped inside its own gilded-cage of glory? The only thought she had, that perhaps silenced and outburst of the victorious kind, was the simple thought they could maybe take this away from her if she told. She wouldn’t let them have that chance, even if they couldn’t do it.

She moved around the unpacked boxes, remnant of a “new move” although they had actually moved in a year ago. The house had been owned by a mysteriously cranky old woman, who had, full of purpose, decided to paint the whole a frightening shade of Pepto-Bismal pink. Of course they had now painted it over, tranquilized the pink, coaxing it into a lighter shade of a less aggressive beige. The old woman had in fact been very mysterious, if not crazy and it took a while for Sue to figure out why all the school kids would cross the street when they got her house. Now she knew, it was in fear of the old woman. The woman had banned anyone from walking near and upon her lawn, as if it was some sort of ancient prized heriloom. She was either very proud of it or eerily obsessed Sue had decided, learning sometime later the woman had planted tulips all around the sides of the house, in hopes they would grow up a familiar shade of pink. When they did not, she beheaded them all.

—- Sue decided only a run would be able to help clear this muddle of surprise and victory in her head. Foot hit pavement and she was walking toward Chebucto, her head exploding with the possibilities of the win, her mouth vowed to silence. 

She hated running, but she also hated gaining weight, so she literally forced herself to run. To walk to the corner of Harvard and Chebucto cajoling herself into a certain state of mind the whole way. You can do it, just run until Quinpool. Running wasn’t all that bad. Sometimes in the adrenaline rush the right word would come to her, the hard candy of a poem, the kind that would couldn’t force of it would break. A right word that would never have surfaced otherwise. She would find it often in a run, capture it and repeat it as mantra the entire way home, triumphant. Running could be good in that way.

But this run was different, almost like a parade, a victory lap through town, a grin directed to of all the glances and smiles. In her head she was saying,  “Yes, you’re right. It’s me, I won the CBC literary prize for poetry.”  She continued this parade down Quinpool, in the typical Halifax winter day, cold and unendingly gray.  She would examine the business signs, searching their shiny-platic for some sort of spelling mistake. The Spartan, for instance, hadn’t seemed to get the spelling for “moussaka” right. 

And so she continued, fixing her glasses and trying to avoid stopping to talk to familiar faces, not wanting to hinder the momentum that she was building, knowing it was possible if something happened she would… But also feeling as if this was her personal procession of winning through the city.

 

 

The lights reflected — from the large posh hotel that faced the corner of — and —-. It modernist design a marker of the new bustling money– of Montreal. OPUS gleamed in  letters across the…

It was different, this Montreal, different from the home she had grown up in, perhaps even completely separate. The ground full-French, not —- of her Irish and — heritage. The night before she had stayed with her  mother, knowing that if she didn’t make some sort of — that she was in town, there would be trouble. So she had returned, half- to her childhood home, the rooms the same, the smells —-, except now cats were allowed on the counters, and that bothered her.  Her mother listening to — the radio, cooking meals back-to-back with no room for breath, and. She could only — a maximum of 24 hours. Possibly because she knew it would be her at some point in her life, possibly. 

So this, the hard-clean lines of the hotel, the swanky pink paint and glistening appliances, was — compared to beige rotary phone and — she had left with her mother.

— She thought how was, telling her mother she’d won. “—- is going to be reading my poems on CBC, at this time.” 

“On what?” He mother replied. “Oh, yes but did you hear about Octo-woman”

Sue knew her mother was happy for her, knew she was proud, but this was the kind of — she received. Similar thus with her daughter, “What did you win again Mom? Everyone is talking about it.”

What had she won? 6,000 dollars which mean time to write really. Time to spend writing…What else? REcognition?

 

But wining used to mean something else. When she was a single mother raising two kids, it meant, Pizza-Hut and dentist’s appointments. It was then she had told her kids if this didn’t work out she promised to get a “real” job.   But she was a writer, blood and bones of ink and pen. But she wasn’t necessarily looking for that It’s nice to be praised once in a while, writing needs to be nourished, but it’s the writer who nourishes their writing not the —-. Time to —–

She has also won a seat on the Celebrity Bird Watching —. Her first book of poetry had birds in the title, so she assumed that was why. 

 

 

 

—–

There she was, sitting in the middle of the dining room, her typewriter on the kitchen table. No office, no writing space. She would sit there, trying to write, finding hearts and doodles, stick men lowering men in cauldron, scribbled all over her work. 

 

—– kids and writing - hard not writing about them

at first they didnt want her writing about them and she respected that. Sometime she did write about them. 

first child when she was 21

first husband, wasn’t sad or depressed just low point. Bought her a typewriter from Canadian tire, brought it home on his bike—

said “You are a writer, you should write.”

 

—When she won the prize for Lures,—told her kids if she didnt win she would get a “real job”

 

 

- never wanted a real job, liked teaching and writing, needed her space- not good at having a boos

 

 

 

– Montreal youth

not too great, crazy family

One shelf of books in English at the library so used to order a box of books in the mail each week. read all those. Read from A-Z when she was here.

 

 

- money will last as long as the soap she stole from her hotel room

 

 

“I keep doing these tests. They say I should write.”

about the test you take to see what job you should have.

 

 

—- House in Halifax, was owned by a crazy old woman. Pepto pink, haunted. 

they have painted it beige-ish. Wants to have a board outside with poems on it everyday for the kids to read as they go to school. Poetry readings in her backyard.

Judicial Board Shenanigans (I feel like I’m going crazy)

March 31st, 2009

The chair of the Judicial Board was a short and awkward person, much more impressive by email than in real life.

We go around the table and introduce ourselves. Most people don’t know how this meeting format works, but think everybody else does, so they are real laced up about it.

Eric Snow makes the first presentation. He is here to convince the Board that they should rule in favour of the DSU executive’s decision about attendance at the DSU Annual General Meeting. The DSU executive had decided that no one holding a King’s student union card would be allowed in, because they hadn’t paid DSU fees, though they may be taking classes at Dal and using DSU services. The DSU executive, apparently, didn’t have time to show up at the Judicial Board meeting themselves, and relied on Snow to defend their point of view.

Eric Snow is a precise thinker. He picks his words like he would pick lint of a sweater: with short pinches. He has his typed notes on the table in front of him. His straight back makes a sharp angle with his legs, and his posture makes it look like he is leaning over his notes as if they were a delicately stacked pile of cards, protecting them from the wind or the clumsy elbows of a neighbour. His tie is neatly tucked away. His glasses make a bridge between his sharply groomed sideburns.

Snow argues that the letter of the regulation that allows any member who attends classes at Dalhousie to make a motion for consideration at the meeting is a mistake, and is contrary to the “spirit of the document” (this “contrary to the spirit” argument really raises Judicial Board member Wojtek Karwala’s hackles).
Snow’s carefully crafted argument references many supporting points in the constitution, but does not stand up well to questions that require him to backtrack and explain individual points, or to consider new information from elsewhere in the regulation. By the end of his presentation, Andy Verboom, who has taken it upon himself to present the opposing argument, says that he wishes his presentation had gone first, because the adjudicators had already made many of his points. Lisa Buchanan makes a repetitious presentation after Snow’s that echoes many of his strongest points, and adds a totally unrelated, unsupported argument that the DSU executive should be allowed from year to year to make the discretionary call about whether King’s student or community members should be allowed to participate in the AGM (I would have thought law students had learnt by their third year not to make unfounded arguments in favour of a binding ruling that would grant more discretionary power to an authority that is only barely accountable to the student body during their term – I guess law school is about learning how to skillfully subvert the rules to the whims of your superiors? But she wasn’t even skillful at it! Either way, the Judicial Board were also deeply suspicious of granting this additional power to the executive).

Even without Buchanan’s legal education or Snow’s exhaustive, almost inbred knowledge of the DSU constitution, Verboom’s argument won over the Judicial Board because it agreed most closely with the Boards own reading of the DSU constitution and  the Academic Calendar. The Board had to bring in the Dalhousie Academic Calendar because the DSU constitution proved to be a highly contradictory document, referring to “students”, “members” and “persons” in different places, without defining what the difference between these groups is: The Board ruled, then, to use the definition of “students” that is in the Academic Calendar, and thus include King’s students.

They emailed their ruling out this morning, and the news of it has spread like wildfire, first appearing on the SMAC website, then in a King’s email from Tara Moorehead, later on punditry.ca, and eventually on the DSU website itself.

There is one catch to this that I can see: It is widely accepted that the April 1 AGM will be incredibly well attended. The debate has degenerated into factional battles, and the factions are using incendiary comments and propaganda to compete against each other to mobilise the broadest support base: at this point, “truth” doesn’t really matter as much as numbers do. In a conversation with the chair of the upcoming meeting, he expressed to me that he was worried about the capacity of the room.

As word has begun to spread about King’s students being allowed in, the impression is that they will actually be able to get in, but two sentence tucked into an email from the DSU communication coordinator seems to contradict that, while not directly contravening the Judicial Board ruling. It says:

“Due to capacity concerns, Dalhousie students with voting rights will be the first to enter the room, followed by non-voting students. Attendance for students without Dalhousie IDs will be on a first-come, first-serve basis, and will be limited based on the capacity of the room.” (this email later made it way to the DSU website)

So, they have prioritized the attendance of Dal students over King’s student, which is not a part of the Judicial Board ruling, and they will make no further arrangements to accommodate those they can refuse entry to by citing capacity (so, there will be no live feed room with a microphone, nor will they attempt to book a space bigger than the McInnis room).

Judging by a smug comment VP of finance and operations Matt Golding made on the SMAC website (see here) the DSU executive are confident that the attendance restriction will allow them to make the anti-King’s exclusion that they initially wanted. Additional evidence from an email Lisa Buchanan has now sent out to the Judicial Board proves that they are willing to engage in even MORE back-door maneuverings to get their way. Read this:

“In light of our discussions at the hearing and your preliminary ruling, Mr. Snow and Matthew Golding, the DSU’s Vice-President (Finance and Operations), each contacted the Dalhousie Registrar’s Office.  Specifically, Mr. Snow sought clarification as to the registration status at Dalhousie of students enrolled at the University of King’s College.  Mr. Golding, in preparation for Wednesday’s General Meeting, requested a list of King’s students enrolled in at least one class at Dalhousie.  He was informed that no such list can be generated.  In the opinion of Dalhousie University, King’s students are not enrolled in Dalhousie classes.  In other words, if a Dalhousie student and a King’s student are enrolled in the same course, the Dalhousie student is enrolled in a Dalhousie course while the King’s student is enrolled in a King’s course.

Based on the information provided by the Registrar’s Office, it is our understanding that there are no King’s students who attend Dalhousie classes. It follows logically from this that no King’s student need be admitted to the General Meeting.

Those of us who made submissions to the Judicial Board last evening made our best efforts to communicate this to the Board. We find it regrettable that the Board did not seek clarification from the Registrar’s Office as to the status of King’s students. We hope that you will take this new information into consideration in preparing your written ruling, in the event that it affects the substance of your decision.”

I am honestly flabbergasted by the direction this story is taking. I’d appreciate any thoughts you folks have on the matter: is this really an incredibly abuse of power, for the DSU executive and their lackeys to go against the rulings of their own appointed Judicial Board? Is this run-of-the-mill?

What do you wish I explained more of, in my telling of this small part of the story? What don’t you understand?