text:
Rejected, extorted, deported: Iraqi family's failed attempt to reach Europe
Teachers who were stuck at Belarus border with their child are back home dejected and with severe debts
After borrowing $10,000, Shamam and her husband Hiwa travelled with their young son Arias to Belarus in search of a better life instead they faced freezing conditions, rejection by border police and extortion from armed men. Photo: Oksana Manchuk
Layla Maghribi
After being caught in the migrant crisis along the Polish-Belarus border in freezing temperatures, two-year-old Arias is finally warm after being forced back home to northern Iraq.
Arias's Iraqi Kurd parents, Hiwa and Shamam, were schoolteachers who made the decision to leave their native homeland for Europe for economic and social reasons.
Like the many thousands of migrants who tried to make their way across European borders recently, their hopes for a safer life were quickly dashed when opposition by Polish and Belarusian authorities left them struggling for survival in outdoor tent settlements instead.
Two-year-old Arias in the woodlands of Belarus. Photo: Sanna Figlarowicz
"Thousands of us were gathered by the border thinking that the European Union would take us in, we were just waiting for some miracle," said Arias' mother, Shamam.
Sometimes the Belarus authorities would take people to what she calls a "camp", which she describes as little more than a cordoned off area on bare ground.
Iraqi Kurd returned from Belarus: 'We did not want to go back'
"Then they would take a few hundred of us and try and push us through a fence to make our way to the Polish border," she said. "My biggest fear is that I would be separated from Arias and Hiwa."
It is a reasonable fear. A four-year-old Iraqi girl has reportedly gone missing after her parents were allegedly pushed to Belarus by border guards resulting in the family's separation.
'Brutal violence' at the border
The migrant crisis along the border that divides Belarus and the European Union resulted in thousands of people who were trying to reach the EU being trapped between Poland and Belarus, living in freezing camps with no humanitarian aid.
Amnesty International has published several claims of migrant abuse along the border by police who have reportedly beaten people with batons, punched them with knuckle dusters and threatened them with security dogs, according to new evidence.
Largely manufactured by the government of Belarus's President Alexander Lukashenko, in retaliation for EU sanctions, the mass migration led to about 20,000 asylum-seekers being lured to the eastern European country and told to cross into Poland.
At its peak, the crisis left about 5,000 people in the wilderness in winter amid dropping temperatures as they continued to be forced back into the forest from either side of the borders, with about a dozen people having been found dead in the wooded area. After weeks of international political stand-offs, Belarus took back some of the migrants into shelters before having them deported back to their country of origin.
The National first wrote about Aria and his family's 10-day plight circling the cold and wet forest along the Kuznica forest in November. They later made another attempt to breach the heavily fortified barriers along the Polish border, but it would be their last. After they were caught by Polish police, the family was rounded up along with dozens of others and sent back to Belarus.
"We were 300 metres away from border but our feet got stuck in wet ground and we were caught. They took us to a building near the fence where we spent the night," Shamam told The National from Iraq's semi-autonomous Kurdish region.
Their passports and mobile phones were taken away and they were given a paper slip telling them they could not return to Poland for three years.
"We asked for asylum but they didn't say anything and forced us back to the border," she said.
The next day, her family and several others were shepherded into buses and cars and sent across to Belarus.
Smugglers exploit people's desperation
Snow had just begun to fall when they reached Belarusian territory, Shamam said. Fearful of the freezing temperatures and another hostile reaction from border authorities, the family decided it was safer to head back to the capital, Minsk, and reconsider their options.
They paid $300 for someone to transport them and a dozen other asylum-seekers the one hour's drive to the city, but their troubles were far from over. Soon after they set off they were driven to an abandoned building where armed men were waiting for them.
"Two men approached us and pulled out guns. They told us we had to pay them $2000 otherwise they would drive us straight to the airport. It was like a mafia," said Shamam.
After failing to get through to Polish territory to claim asylum, Arias and his parents spent a week in Minsk before being deported back to Belarus. Photo: Shamam
Terrified, the 14 adults in the vehicle pooled the money they had together and paid the unknown men. Shamam said the driver was given just $100 of the money they had handed over and told to continue the journey to Minsk.
Once they reached the city, a Polish activist helped Shamam and Hiwa find a place to stay for them to recuperate. A week later, the family decided to try and make for the border again but before they did, they were picked up by Belarusian police and taken straight to the airport where a plane to Iraq was waiting.
"I begged them to let us stay but it was pointless," Shamam said. "All that suffering, all that cold and thirst we experienced in the forest, all that effort and money, for nothing."
Police target 455 social media accounts exploiting migrants fleeing to Europe
Shamam said there were 430 people on the flight she and her family took back to Iraq. More than 3,000 migrants have been flown back there from Belarus in the past few weeks after unsuccessful attempts to cross into Poland turned into a humanitarian and political crisis. Many asylum-seekers reported being beaten by guards on both sides of the borders, others described being stripped of their clothes and belongings before being pushed into the freezing forest.
Shamam and Hiwa had borrowed $10,000 to take the journey that would lead them right back to where they started. She said they paid intermediaries $3500 for each of the three visas they got to travel to Belarus. Having been absent from his job for over a month, Hiwa was dismissed by his employer and is now unemployed. They are now relying on relatives to live.
Barely surviving is what had pushed the couple to make the harrowing journey in the first place, said Shamam. Her husband was only receiving his salary every few months and Shamam, a graduate in English, was being paid $1-a-lesson to teach the language at a government institute.
Migrants inside the transport and logistics centre on the Belarusian-Polish border, in the Grodno region. Reuters
"Sometimes Hiwa was paid, sometimes he wasn't. Sometimes the government would say it was 'saving' his salary for him," scoffed Shamam. "What they show us on TV [in Iraq's semi-autonomous Kurdish region] is so different from the reality. How can a country that is one of the largest oil exporters in the world be one of the poorest? Someone is stealing the money, they're lying to us."
Jobless, traumatised and thousands of dollars in debt, Shamam said she did not regret making the journey.
"No, I don't [regret], we don't really have the option to live safely in Iraq. We will try to leave again but this time in another way, maybe someone can sponsor us or we can find a legal way to emigrate."
Given that several thousand people remain trapped along the border, in detention camps or fearfully in hiding, Shamam may find the difficulties of living in Iraq's semi-autonomous Kurdish region more palatable than trying to push through increasingly anti-immigrant policies in Western Europe.
Updated: December 22, 2021, 12:13 PM


text:
125 Pillar Of Support
"What are you smiling at?" Yanee asked with a pout.
Tohru raised a brow in her direction but he didn't look angry. He however, looked very much aggrieved. "What? I already can't tell others about my girlfriend and now I can't smile when I'm happy too?"
Yanee raised an eyebrow back. Although she felt a bit sorry for him, she didn't want to compromise on the topic of their relationship being known to other people. Before arriving at the office, she had already told Tohru about it.
It's not that she totally didn't want others to know that they're together. It's just that aside from Chummy, she didn't want the rest of the people at the office to know about them— at least, not yet.
"Are you complaining?" she asked him softly and almost immediately, he shook his head.
Find authorized novels in Webnovel, faster updates, better experience, Please click <a href>www.webnovel.com/book/office-diaries_13370184206636605/pillar-of-support_46475709945791153 for visiting.
He stepped closer and pulled her in his embrace. "I'm just teasing you, honey. I really understand your concern."

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Exceptions to the CC BY Licence
3.4 Classification of Igneous Rock
Review of Minerals and Rocks
10.1 Alfred Wegener: The Father of Plate Tectonics
10.4 Plate, Plate Motions, and Plate Boundary Processes
17.2 Landforms and Coastal Erosion
17.3 Landforms and Coastal Deposition
20.2 Industrial Materials
Appendix 1: List of Geologically Important Elements and the Periodic Table
Appendix 2: Answers to Review Questions
Appendix 3: Answers to Exercises
Links for Print Edition
Physical Geology – 2nd Edition
After carefully reading this chapter, completing the exercises within it, and answering the questions at the end, you should be able to:
Summarize the factors that influence the nature of metamorphic rocks and explain why each one is important.
Describe foliation and explain the mechanisms for its formation in metamorphic rocks.
Classify metamorphic rocks on the basis of their texture and mineral content, and explain the origins of these differences.
Describe the various settings in which metamorphic rocks are formed and the links between plate tectonics and metamorphism.
Summarize the important processes of regional metamorphism, and explain how rocks that were metamorphosed at depths of 10 kilometres or 20 kilometres can now be found on Earth's surface.
Describe the important processes of contact metamorphism and metasomatism, and the key role hydrothermal fluids.
is the change that takes place within a body of rock as a result of it being subjected to conditions that are different from those in which it formed. In most cases—but not all—this involves the rock being deeply buried beneath other rocks, where it is subjected to higher temperatures and pressures than those under which it formed. Metamorphic rocks typically have different mineral assemblages and different textures from their parent rocks (Figure 7.0.1) but they may have the same overall chemical composition.
Figure 7.0.1 Metamorphic rock (gneiss) of the Okanagan Metamorphic and Igneous Complex at Skaha Lake, B.C. The dark bands are amphibole-rich, the light bands are feldspar-rich.
Most metamorphism results from the burial of igneous, sedimentary, or pre-existing metamorphic rocks to the point where they experience different pressures and temperatures than those at which they formed (Figure 7.0.2). Metamorphism can also take place if cold rock near the surface is intruded and heated by a hot igneous body. Although most metamorphism involves temperatures above 150°C, some metamorphism takes place at temperatures lower than those at which the parent rock formed.
Figure 7.0.2 The rock cycle, showing the processes related to metamorphic rocks at the bottom. [Image description]
Image Descriptions
Figure 7.0.2 image description: As sedimentary rock (or igneous rock) gets buried deeper and comes under increased heat and pressure, it can turn into metamorphic rock. That rock may be returned to surface for us to see, but if it gets buried deeper still it may partially melt to become magma. [Return to Figure 7.0.2]
Media Attributions
Figure 7.0.1, 7.0.2: © Steven Earle. CC BY.
the transformation of a parent rock into a new rock as a result of heat and pressure that leads to the formation of new minerals, or recrystallization of existing minerals, without melting
Previous: Summary
Next: 7.1 Controls Over Metamorphic Processes
Physical Geology - 2nd Edition by Steven Earle is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.


In a previous entry, we briefly looked at Amazon's Web Services from a high level. Now that I have my application running reasonably well and debugged, I wanted to write a bit more about my experience. I'm not claiming true expertise here, but I've done my best to learn what I can and hope I can pass on some of this in a comprehensible way.
So it has certainly been a learning experience trying to understand the overall picture for how one writes an application on top of these APIs. As background material in this domain, I found the Google FS, Bigtable, and Map/Reduce papers useful, as well as the Building Scalable Websites O'Reilly book by a Flickr developer. If you don't read anything else, read the Map/Reduce paper at least – every programmer should understand it. Coming from the perspective of an OS/desktop developer, I personally found the GFS and Bigtable papers the most interesting as compared to the POSIX file APIs and SQL, respectively.
One of the most important things I've learned is that there are two kinds of "scalable". One is the kind of "scalable" that MySQL clustering, JBoss clustering, etc. offer. These systems take you from one machine to smaller values of N. They're typically based on UDP broadcasts or the like.
The other kind of scale is called "web scale" – this is where your application is a completely distributed system, running in multiple data centers. No one machine is truly critical. Your application gets just faster as you add machines.
What's the tradeoff between "scalable" and "web scale"? The answer is pretty simple. Your application has a number of facets such as reliability, consistency, and availability. Researchers have essentially come to the conclusion that you can't have all 3 at the same time as load increases, and of the 3 you almost certainly want to sacrifice (immediate) consistency. If I write a new review of a book on Amazon, someone hitting Reload on the same page a few seconds later might not see it. If I receive an email in GMail, it might fail to be in the search index. If I delete a picture from Flickr, it might still be in my "photostream" display. But one property the system can have is eventual consistency, on the order of minutes or even seconds perhaps, but not immediate. My review should eventually appear to the person pressing refresh, the email will appear in the search index, and my picture will truly be gone (from the UI, anyways).
If you look at almost any modern web development framework like JBoss Seam, TurboGears, Rails, etc etc., at the heart is a relational database for storage. Using a relational database lets you effectively push most of the hard problems like persistent storage and concurrent access onto an external system (though that could be in-process using SQLite). There are some very smart people who developed SQLite, MySQL, Postgres, etc. A relational database gives you a lot for free, and unless you know what you're doing, you should probably not attempt to store your data directly using say the POSIX file APIs (and this is true on the desktop side too, but that's another blog entry).
In other words, for a lot of applications, relational databases are exactly the right solution. You can get very far with a relational/small cluster system; Wikimedia is an example here, though their job is obviously made much easier by the fact that reads truly dominate access.
Also worth mentioning is the approach of partitioning a relational database; though at this point you're starting to move away from the normalized relational model, since you can no longer perform an operation over your entire data set.
It should come as no surprise that there's no magic API to code to in order to create a web-scale system. What you need to do depends on your application. You need to have an understanding for how data flows into your system, what kinds of operations you need to perform on it, where and how you can sacrifice consistency, etc. There's a lot of more implementation/deployment level things like load balancing and tuning that matter a lot too.
However, there is a sort of general approach of asynchronous, cached data generation. In the relational model, every web page view creates a transaction which gets the data it needs, then returns. This way your users always see up-to-date information. But in the web scale model, you can massively denormalize by precomputing data. The advantage is a web page request goes no where near a database; you simply pull the cached data from storage close to the edge web server. When you get a mutation in your system, you trigger an asynchronous (e.g. map/reduce) process to regenerate all the cached data. This may not be instant, but with some intelligence in your system you should still be able to have eventual consistency.
Let's say you're writing a bug tracker. In a traditional web app, you'd have a form which would do a POST to send an updated comment. In the handler for that POST you open a transaction, and append a new row to your Comments table. But in a distributed system, you could generate cached data for each bug. A GET request for that bug is just a simple transformation of the cached data (perhaps XSLT, or maybe you save the final HTML). But the POST request to add a comment put is into a reliable work queue (like SQS). Another machine reads from this queue and triggers a regeneration of the cached bug data – which could be more than just the cached data for that particular bug. Let's say you want to be able to display a list of all open bugs. One way to handle this would be to store in S3 a key /open/ for each bug. Then a query of open bugs maps to a listing of all keys with that prefix. But probably what you really want for these kinds of metadata operations is a system like Hypertable or SimpleDB.
A new kind of operating system?
If you look at Amazon's APIs, they provide the root services you'd expect of an operating system: storage (key/value as opposed to hierarchical), IPC (reliable/persistent), and task creation (Xen image as opposed to process/thread). The challenge though is rewriting applications to use new APIs.
I mentioned in the previous entry that I thought storage was the most important of these 3. There are a lot of messaging systems out there (in particular AMQP looks pretty good), and virtualization APIs abound. But there are many fewer high-profile storage APIs. Storage is hard, and rewriting applications for a new form of storage is not at all trivial. That's why so much is invested in POSIX-compatible storage systems – if you have that, then you instantly have Apache, rsync, and probably on the order of hundreds of thousands of other useful applications. But there are limits to the POSIX API; the Google FS paper discusses those. Just as there are limits to the relational model. What is going to be interesting over the next few years is to see which of these new APIs start to win application developers, and how the traditional database-based free software development stacks adapt.


Joint and Several Liability Reform: SB 1494 (1995).
Bars application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of all damages from defendants found to be less than 60% at fault. (The law formerly extended the 60% threshold for noneconomic damages only.) The reform does not apply to toxic torts.
Joint and Several Liability Reform: SB 2703, SB 2708 (1987): N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:15-5.3.
Bars application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of all damages from defendants found to be less than 20% at fault. Bars application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of noneconomic damages from defendants found to be between 20% and 60% at fault.
Collateral Source Rule Reform: SB 2703, SB 2708 (1987): N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:15-92.
Provides for awards to be offset by collateral source payments other than workers' compensation and life insurance benefits.
Product Liability Reform: SB 1495 (1995).
Excludes product sellers from strict liability in product liability actions.
Product Liability Reform: SB 2805 (1987).
Provides that a manufacturer or seller of a product is liable only if the plaintiff proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the product was not suitable or safe because it: (1) deviated from the design specifications or performance standards; (2) failed to contain adequate warnings; or (3) was designed in a defective manner. Provides that a manufacturer or seller is not liable if at the time the product left the manufacturer's control there was not available a practical and feasible alternative design that would have prevented the harm. Provides that a product's design is not defective if the harm results from an inherent characteristic of the product that is known to the ordinary person who uses or consumes it. Provides that a manufacturer or seller is not liable for a design defect if the harm results from an unavoidably unsafe aspect of a product and the product was accompanied by an adequate warning. Provides that the state of the art provision does not apply if the court makes all of the following determinations: (1) that the product is egregiously unsafe; (2) that the user could not be expected to have knowledge of the product's risk; and (3) that the product has little or no usefulness. Provides that a manufacturer or seller in a warning‑defect case is not liable if an adequate warning is given. (An adequate warning is one that a reasonably prudent person in the similar circumstances would have provided.) Establishes a rebuttable presumption that a government (FDA) warning is adequate.
Punitive Damages Reform: Damages Limits: SB 1496 (1995): N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:15‑5.14.
Limits the award of punitive damages to the greater of five times the award of compensatory damages or $350,000. The reform does not apply to cases involving bias crimes, discrimination, AIDS testing disclosure, sexual abuse, and injuries caused by drunk drivers.
Punitive Damages Reform: Actual Malice: SB 2805 (1987).
Requires a plaintiff to show that a defendant acted with "actual malice" or "wanton and willful disregard" for the rights of others. Requires the determination of awards for punitive damages to be made in a separate proceeding. Provides for an FDA government standards defense to punitive damages. The reform does not apply to cases involving environmental torts.
A court may assess costs and attorney fees upon a finding that a complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim or defense of a nonprevailing party was frivolous.
Requires a written demand be made on the corporation for derivative suits. The new demand requirement grants the company 90 days to respond and stays all proceedings, including discovery, during this period. It also allows the corporation to move for a stay of proceedings if it is currently conducting an investigation. Raises the amount of ownership in the company that a shareholder must have in order to avoid posting security in any shareholder class action or derivative suit. Requires that the shareholder hold ownership at the time of filing suit and remains a shareholder for the duration of the suit. Next and significantly, the court shall dismiss the case if the corporation moves for dismissal after specified groups have determined "in good faith, after conducting a reasonable inquiry upon which its conclusions are based, the maintenance of the derivative proceedings is not in the best interest of the corporation." The specified groups include: (1) a majority vote of shareholders; (2) a majority vote of independent directors; (3) a majority vote of a committee appointed by independent directors; (4) a panel appointed by the court at the request of the corporation. Finally, introduces a fee shifting provision which requires plaintiffs to pay the corporation if the suit was brought without the exercise of reasonable diligence, cause or with improper purpose.


text:
Sunil Pai
Sunil Pai, MD is internationally recognized an expert in Integrative Medicine, a health activist/influencer and thought leader in the wellness industry. After his residency in Family Medicine at the University of New Mexico he became Board Certified in Family Medicine. He was one of the first physicians 16 years ago and youngest in the U.S. to become a Fellow of the Program in Integrative Medicine at University of Arizona (Class 2002) directed by Dr. Andrew Weil, the "father" of Integrative Medicine. Dr. Pai also became one of the first Board Certified MD's in Holistic Integrative Medicine in the U.S.. After his Fellowship training, he then studied with and become certified by Dr. Deepak Chopra as a Primordial Sound Meditation Instructor and a Creating Health (Ayurveda Lifestyle) Instructor. Dr. Pai then went further to enhance his knowledge Ayurvedic Medicine through specialized training at the Sri Dharmasthala Manjunatheshwara College of Ayurveda, and Intensive Yoga Therapies at the Vivekananda Yoga Anusandhana Samsthana in India. Having trained under the two foremost gurus of natural medicine and mind-body medicine, he then became certified in Functional Medicine, Homotoxicology, and Physiological Regulating Medicine. In addition to mastering the fundamentals of these approaches, he went on to expand his services to patients by becoming certified in Medical Acupuncture and Neuro-Acupuncture through Stanford University School of Medicine and from the world's expert in Neuro-Acupuncture, Dr. Jason Hao. From working close with Dr. Hao since 2006, Dr. Pai was elected to be the Vice President of the Neuro-Acupuncture Institute, a non-profit organization focusing on teaching physicians neuro-acupuncture which is focused for pain conditions and neurological dysfunction such as stroke, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's, traumatic brain injury, cerebral palsy and autism. Dr. Pai also specializes in Auriculotherapy, a unique system of ear acupuncture that focuses on treatment of both food and inhalant allergies. In addition to treatment of food allergies, Dr. Pai is provides up-to-date information on diet and lifestyle changes and its role in chronic diseases and cancer. Dr. Pai is certified in Plant-Based Nutrition from Cornell University and the T. Colin Campbell Foundation and teaches each patient about the health benefits of eating whole food plant based diets. Sunil Pai, MD is a Deacon of the House of Sanjevani Integrative Medicine Health & Lifestyle Center located in Albuquerque, an Integrated Auxiliary of the Priory of Santa Fe. As a nonprofit organization, they provide full service health education and Integrative Medicine services with emphasis in indigenous and natural medicines. Part of this approach encompasses the patient's belief system as an integral part of their health and healing. Sanjevani is also certified by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM), as an Educational Alliance Partner for delivering evidence based, clinical plant based nutritional programs. Dr. Pai specializes in custom formulation of dietary supplements including vitamins, minerals, Ayurvedic herbs, medical foods, homeopathics and CBD (cannabidiols) using safe, clinically effective ingredients. He has been a consultant to various nutraceutical companies as well as functional medicine testing companies. Over the past 14 years, Dr. Pai has studied the processing of raw materials from farm to manufacturing and from the bench top research to clinical studies. His interest in the benefits of natural therapies led to the development of Sanjevani nutraceutical products. Dr. Pai has become internationally recognized by his Sanjevani's flagship product, Bosmeric-SR®, the strongest natural supplement for pain and inflammation support available worldwide. The all-natural, patented ingredients in a unique delivery system provides a bi-layered tablet with an immediate onset of action within 20 minutes and long lasting sustained release over an 8 hour period. Dr. Pai recently released his critically acclaimed book An Inflammation Nation The Definitive 10-step Guide to Preventing, Treating and Reversing All Diseases Through Diet, Lifestyle and the Use of Natural Anti-Inflammatories for the prevention and treatment of chronic diseases and cancer. The Forward written by his mentor and teacher Dr. Andrew Weil. Dr. Pai is also a Clinical Assistant Professor at the Department of Family and Community Medicine at the University of New Mexico School of Medicine and conducts seminars and workshops on a variety of health conditions. Dr. Pai lectures at national conferences and is actively publishing in in the field of Integrative Medicine. Dr. Pai is one of a select group of Integrative Medicine physicians in the U.S. and only MD in New Mexico to be published in all 4 editions of David Rakel's Integrative Medicine [Chapter: "Peripheral Neuropathy"] published by Saunders, and in Benjamin Klinger and Roberta Anne Lee's Integrative Medicine: Principles in Practice [Chapter: "Ayurvedic Medicine"] published by McGraw-Hill. Recently he has had two articles published in Cancer Strategies Journal titled "Plant Based Diet and Natural Anti-Inflammatories Help, Prevent and Treat Cancer" and is a recognized leader in cannabinoid medicines with an published article "Cannabinoid Medicine From Industrial Hemp Oil: Another Practical and Legal Cannabidiol (CBD) Alternative." Dr. Pai will also be assisting in launching a premium CBD line of products which are organic, non-gmo, water soluble formulations (increasing absorption of over 400%) in eco-friendly packaging blended with vitamins, Ayurvedic herbs blended in tinctures, vitamin shots, ice teas and vegan shakes. Do to his success with cancer supportive therapies, Dr. Pai was featured in the acclaimed internet documentary series "The Truth About Cancer: The Quest for the Cures Continues" (2014), "The Truth About Cancer: The Global Quest" (2015) and "The Truth About Cancer Ultimate Live Symposium" (2016). Dr. Pai is known for being a health activist/influencer. He is sought out lecturer for speaking about the hidden truths within the food, pharmaceutical and dietary supplement industries. From this demand of information requested from him, he will soon be releasing a YouTube Channel providing EBR (Evidence Based Reviews) on dietary supplements, food products and common medications that are being heavily marketed to the public on the internet, health food stores and pharmacies. By providing the public with honest and evidence based information on these products, from reviewing the label claims, ingredients and marketing information, Dr. Pai will guide the consumer to distinguish what is fact from fiction. Empowering consumers and patients with education and increasing their consciousness are key elements in helping those achieve optimum health. Dr. Pai consults with cancer clinics in U.S., Mexico, Thailand, India, Costa Rica and China on teaching his integrative medicine chronic disease and cancer supportive protocols. Dr. Pai lives in Albuquerque, New Mexico is also known as the "RocDoc" as his hobbies include playing drums, guitar and music trivia. Other interests include hiking and walking his dog, plant based cooking and yoga.
"the author writes in a simple, straightforward manner, engaging his subject with an enthusiasm and joy that make this book a pleasure to read. A complete and detailed guide to integrative healing methods by a well-known doctor who specializes in alternative tactics to address the inflammation that underlies many chronic health issues."
An Inflammation Nation
BY Sunil Pai • POSTED ON April 27, 2016
Pai, a board-certified doctor in family and integrative medicine who has studied with Andrew Weil and Deepak Chopra, offers this voluminous compendium of alternative health approaches.
This debut book reflects current and widespread dissatisfaction with Western medicine. Far from attacking standard medicine, however, the author credits it with providing heroic miracle cures in health crisis situations. But in the case of chronic conditions, Western medicine often treats symptoms with a retinue of drugs and surgery while leaving underlying causal conditions untouched. "Conventional medical treatment has classified over two hundred different 'itis' conditions, with over a dozen different types of medical specializations that treat these individually and symptomatically," Pai writes in describing standardized medical care. The "itis" ending in the terms for many ailments refers to inflammation, which covers a wide swath of chronic medical conditions that plague Americans. The author describes in sometimes-sickening detail all the causes of inflammation that abound in what people eat, drink, and breathe. He mentions so-called "Moo Gloo," a repellent food modifier that utilizes scrap meat in a binding formula to convert cheap cuts into more expensive-seeming meats. Almost nothing Americans encounter to eat or drink remains uncorrupted, according to the author, and that goes for many foods that bear organic labels. The author's exceptionally detailed investigation leads to but one conclusion: a plant-based diet to avoid inflammatories, appropriate water filtration, and energizing and proper health supplementation all can go a long way to address common chronic health conditions that plague those who suffer from the many "itis" ailments. In this well-researched work, Pai attacks the purity and quality of many supplements on the market today. Through his clinic, House of Sanjevani, he has formulated his own supplements that meet his rigorous standards. The thorough volume provides lots of information, but the author writes in a simple, straightforward manner, engaging his subject with an enthusiasm and joy that make this book a pleasure to read.
A complete and detailed guide to integrative healing methods by a well-known doctor who specializes in alternative tactics to address the inflammation that underlies many chronic health issues.
Pub Date: April 27, 2016
Publisher: RocDoc Publications
Review Posted Online: July 21, 2016
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Sept. 15, 2016
Awards, Press & Interests
Integrative Medicine MD, Health activist/influencer
Unexpected skill or talent
Playing drums and guitar
Educate and empower people to achieve optimum health.


text:
VT Supreme Ct.
Cheryl J. Brown v. State of Vermont
Supreme Court of Vermont.
No. 2017-180
Decided: October 01, 2017
PRESENT: Reiber, C.J., Skoglund, Robinson, Eaton and Carroll, JJ. Rabbi StuartJay Robinson, Grand Isle, for Plaintiff-Appellant. Thomas J. Donovan, Jr., Attorney General, and Jon T. Alexander, Assistant Attorney General, Montpelier, for Defendant-Appellee.
¶ 1. Cheryl Brown appeals from a jury verdict finding the State responsible for a motor vehicle accident, but also finding Brown had not proven any resulting injuries and thus was not entitled to any damages. Brown alleges several errors in pre-trial and trial rulings, as well as in the failure to grant her a new trial. We affirm.
¶ 2. We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict. J.A. Morrissey, Inc. v. Smejkal, 2010 VT 66, ¶ 9, 188 Vt. 245, 56 A.3d 701. Applying that standard, the evidence at trial was as follows. Shortly after 5:00 p.m. on May 16, 2012, Cheryl Brown and Matthew Denis were involved in a traffic accident on Route 15 near St. Michael's College in Colchester, when Denis's truck bumped into Brown's car from behind. Denis claimed the accident happened when he inadvertently took his foot off the brake as he turned to roll the rear window down to provide fresh air to his dog, who was riding in the back seat. Denis's truck, which was positioned behind Brown's car, rolled forward five to six feet, striking her rear bumper. The collision took place in stop-and-go traffic. Denis, a sergeant with the Vermont State Police, estimated his speed at impact to be two miles per hour and did not believe there was any damage caused to Brown's vehicle from the collision. Brown claimed the impact caused a scratch on her rear bumper. The truck Denis was driving did not have any markings indicating it was a police vehicle.
¶ 3. After the collision, Denis got out of his truck and suggested they move their vehicles to a nearby parking lot to exchange information. He also asked Brown if she was hurt; she denied any injury at that time. Brown claimed Denis did not identify himself at the time of the collision. Denis returned to his truck and began moving it to the parking lot. Brown's vehicle remained stopped on Route 15, so Denis paused beside it and again suggested they meet in the parking lot. While stopped on Route 15, Brown called 911. During that call, she learned that Denis had also called in to police dispatch to report the accident, that Denis was a police officer, and that he was waiting in the nearby parking lot. Once the Colchester Police responded to the scene, Brown moved her car to the same parking lot that Denis had suggested, and Denis and Brown exchanged the pertinent accident information.
¶ 4. Subsequently, Brown filed suit against the State of Vermont alleging it was responsible for injuries she sustained in the accident due to Denis's negligence. Brown also raised constitutional claims, alleging: (1) due process and equality of treatment violations under the Vermont Constitution's Common Benefits Clause, and (2) an equal protection, and possibly a due process, claim under the United States Constitution. Brown did not name Denis as a defendant in her suit. Brown's constitutional claims were based on her assertion that Denis received favorable treatment because he was not prosecuted for causing the accident or leaving the scene without providing identifying information.
¶ 5. Before trial, the court granted the State's motion for partial summary judgment, dismissing Brown's constitutional claims. The Court dismissed the due process and equal protection claims under the United States Constitution on the basis that Brown had only sued the State, and not Denis personally, and that the State was not a "person" for claims arising under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court further ruled that Brown lacked standing to assert any claim based on the State's failure to prosecute Denis. The court also dismissed the Common Benefits Clause claim because Brown lacked any cognizable interest in the prosecution or discipline of Denis. Lastly, the court held that, to the extent a due process claim had been raised, it was undisputed that Brown received the information required to be exchanged in the event of a car collision shortly after the accident, and her ability to file suit against the State as a result of the accident showed her due process rights were not impeded.
¶ 6. Throughout the trial, Brown contested the court's evidentiary rulings, which limited the scope of inquiry by her counsel and evidence she sought to present. Consistent with its pre-trial rulings, the court refused to permit voir dire questioning, discussion in opening statements, or trial testimony concerning matters related to Brown's characterization of the aftermath of the accident as a "hit and run," a "conspiracy" to allow Denis to receive favorable treatment, or falsification of evidence. On appeal, she claims the restrictions on the voir dire, remarks of counsel, and introduction of evidence resulted in a tainted jury, deprived her of due process, and denied her a fair trial.
¶ 7. Beyond rulings on the scope of what she was allowed to present, Brown alleges several additional errors concerning evidentiary rulings during trial. She claims to have first learned of the existence of a dog in Denis's car during opening statements. She claims the disclosure of the dog at trial constituted new evidence because the dog was not disclosed as a witness to the accident or listed in the police report as being in Denis's car. She claims the late disclosure of the dog is prejudice of sufficient magnitude to constitute structural error requiring the court to declare a mistrial, despite Brown's failure to request one and her failure to depose Denis prior to trial. Further, she alleges the court erroneously allowed the admission of photographs of the vehicles taken by Denis after the accident because an improper foundation was laid to admit them, and their admission was the result of preferential treatment given to the State She also claims the court erroneously allowed Denis to testify about a speed experiment he did after the accident, during which he took his foot off the brake in a parking lot and allowed his truck to move forward, providing the basis for his estimate of a two mile per hour impact speed.
¶ 8. At trial, Brown claimed she received injuries to her neck, shoulder, and shoulder blade in the accident. In 2007, Brown had been involved in another rear-end collision; at that time, she was treated by a physician for injuries to her back, neck, and shoulder. Her treating physician for the accident at issue—the 2012 accident—opined that the injuries Brown claimed to have suffered were new injuries and not an aggravation of her prior injuries from 2007. The expert admitted that Brown had not told her of any prior history of neck or shoulder pain. Brown also testified that the injuries she received in the 2012 accident were new ones, unconnected to the earlier 2007 injuries. A defense medical expert claimed the 2012 accident was unlikely to have caused Brown any new injury because of its low speed and his expectation that such a collision would not be sufficient to cause any appreciable injury. He also testified to the lack of any objective medical findings indicating a traumatic injury to Brown from the 2012 accident.
¶ 9. By agreement of the parties, a proposed jury charge concerning aggravation of a pre-existing condition was not given. During deliberations, the jury questioned whether it should be considering reaggravation of a previous injury in determining whether the 2012 accident caused any damages to Brown. Again, with the agreement of the parties, the court told the jurors that Brown was not claiming defendant's negligence aggravated any previous injury; rather, Brown claimed that the 2012 accident caused the injuries to which she testified at trial and that those injuries were new. The jury subsequently found Brown had not proven the 2012 accident caused any injuries. Brown now claims that the trial court erroneously considered that aggravation of a pre-existing condition was an issue in the case and that the jury erroneously disregarded the evidence that Brown had sustained new injuries in the 2012 accident.
¶ 10. Finally, Brown claims the trial court's erroneous evidentiary rulings resulted in prejudice to her, depriving her of a fair trial. She asserts the trial court abused its discretion by denying her motion for a new trial. We address her arguments in turn.
I. Summary Judgment Ruling
¶ 11. We turn first to Brown's claim of error in granting the State's partial summary judgment motion dismissing her constitutional claims. We review summary judgment rulings de novo, In re All Metals Recycling, Inc., 2014 VT 101, ¶ 6, 197 Vt. 481, 107 A.3d 895, and we review a grant of summary judgment using the same standard of review applied by the trial court. Greene v. Stevens Gas Serv., 2004 VT 67, ¶ 9, 177 Vt. 90, 858 A.2d 238. "Summary judgment is appropriate only where the moving party establishes that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Samplid Enters., Inc. v. First Vt. Bank, 165 Vt. 22, 25, 676 A.2d 774, 776 (1996); V.R.C.P. 56(a).
¶ 12. On appeal, Brown asserts an equal protection claim under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, alleging Denis was afforded a "forbidden double standard" because he was not charged with leaving the scene of an accident, given a citation for following another vehicle too closely, or otherwise disciplined as a result of the accident. Less clear is whether she also asserted a denial of due process claim, which is not expressly stated in her complaint, although the trial court considered such a claim to have been made. In the pursuit of clarity, we will also consider Brown to have raised a due process claim in her complaint.1
¶ 13. Claims for violations of federal constitutional rights are asserted under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which provides a remedy for individuals who allege they have been deprived of a federal right by those acting under color of state law. 42 U.S.C. § 1983; Williams v. State, 156 Vt. 42, 47, 589 A.2d 840, 844 (1990) ("[The statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1983,] provides a private remedy for those alleging abridgment of federal rights by 'persons' acting 'under color of' state law ․ [and was] intended to provide a federal forum for those seeking vindication of federal rights ․"). Claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 may be brought in either federal or state court; however, § 1983 may not be used to support claims for deprivation of state constitutional rights. Bock v. Gold, 2008 VT 81, ¶ 10, 184 Vt. 575, 959 A.2d 990 (mem.).
¶ 14. Here, Brown's complaint did not expressly reference 42 U.S.C. § 1983, but it is the vehicle for persons claiming to have been deprived of federal constitutional rights, as Brown does. Williams, 156 Vt. at 47, 589 A.2d at 843-44. Brown alleged that her constitutional due process and equal protection rights were violated when Denis, "acting under color of law," hit her car, failed to provide the necessary identifying information, left the scene, and was not prosecuted for these actions—constituting preferential treatment. U.S. Const. amends. V, XIV. As such, Brown's assertions that the State violated her rights under the U. S. Constitution trigger 42 U.S.C. § 1983 analysis. For various reasons, these claims are unsuccessful.
¶ 15. Brown's complaint was brought solely against the State and sought monetary, not injunctive, relief. With respect to claims for monetary damages, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 may not be used to assert a deprivation of a federal rights claim against a state, as a state is not a "person" for purposes of the statute. Will v. Mich. Dep't of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 64, 71 (1989) (concluding that neither a state nor an official acting in their official capacity are "persons" within the meaning of 42 V.S.C. § 1983); Williams, 156 Vt. at 47, 589 A.2d at 844. (referencing Will, 491 U.S. at 64 and concluding that a state is not a person under § 1983 jurisprudence). The Eleventh Amendment bars such suits against a state unless the state has waived its immunity or Congress has expressly overridden that immunity. Will, 491 U.S. at 66. Here, Brown explicitly leveled her complaint against the State of Vermont, not Denis; she is seeking monetary damages for the injuries suffered due to the accident; and there is no evidence that the State waived its immunity. Welch v. Tex. Dep't of Highways & Pub. Transp., 483 U.S. 468, 473 (1987) (reiterating that the Court will find a waiver by a state "only where stated by the most express language" or by "such overwhelming implications ․ as [will] leave no room for any other reasonable construction" (quotations omitted)). Because Brown's suit was against the State, and because, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a state is not a "person," as is required to maintain the claim, summary judgment for the State was proper on her equal protection and due process claims.
¶ 16. Additionally, Brown raised a distinct claim that the alleged double standard resulted in a deprivation of a common benefit under Article 7 of the Vermont Constitution.2 The Common Benefits Clause of the Vermont Constitution and the federal Equal Protection Clause differ markedly in language, historical origin, purpose, and development. While the Equal Protection Clause may supplement the protections afforded by the Common Benefits Clause, it does not "supplant [the state constitution] as the first and primary safeguard of the rights and liberties of all Vermonters." Baker v. State, 170 Vt. 194, 202, 744 A.2d 864, 870 (1999). The purpose of the Common Benefits Clause is to ensure that protections conferred by the State are for "the common benefit of the community" and not just a part of the community. Id. at 212.
¶ 17. We have identified three core elements that must comprise any potential constitutional tort claim based on a violation of Article 7.3 In re Town Highway No. 20, 2012 VT 17, ¶ 37, 191 Vt. 231, 45 A.3d 54. First, a "plaintiff must show the denial of a common benefit" due to "disparate and arbitrary treatment when compared to others similarly situated." Id. Second, the plaintiff must demonstrate that "the denial directly favors another particular individual or group." Id. Third, because we must defer to any "reasonable and just" basis supporting "a discretionary judgment by a governmental decisionmaker," a plaintiff bears the burden of proving both that the decision was "wholly irrational and arbitrary," and that it was "actuated by personal motives unrelated to the duties of the defendant's official position, such as ill will, vindictiveness, or financial gain." Id. (quotation omitted).
¶ 18. In this case, Brown is unable to establish the first prong of the required showing—denial of a common benefit. There is no deprivation of a common benefit because Brown has no legally cognizable interest in the prosecution of Denis, or any criminal or disciplinary consequences that may ensue. She has not been deprived of any common benefit and therefore cannot show any disparate or arbitrary treatment from others similarly situated. Summary judgment for the State was proper on Brown's Common Benefits claim.
II. In Limine Rulings
¶ 19. Having granted summary judgment concerning Brown's constitutional claims, Brown's claims regarding the alleged "hit and run," police "conspiracy," and invidious "double standard" were no longer within the purview of the court's proceedings—the only claim remaining for trial was Brown's claim for personal injury. As a result, the trial court granted an in limine motion and refused to allow voir dire of potential jurors, discussion in opening statements, or admission of evidence at trial concerning: the "hidden double standard" or other related characterizations of Denis leaving the accident scene as a "hit and run"; the State's failure to prosecute Denis and alleged falsification of evidence; and Brown's claims regarding violations of her constitutional rights. The trial court found that those matters were irrelevant to a negligence personal injury claim. Brown asserts the limitations on her ability to inquire of prospective jurors about these matters resulted in a tainted jury, but she provides no explanation why this is the case. She further claims these limitations regarding opening statements and exclusion of the evidence resulted in an unfair trial.
¶ 20. We find these arguments unavailing. Matters concerning the conduct of trial, and the admission of evidence therein, rest with the discretion of the trial judge, shaped by the rules of evidence. First and foremost, it is the trial court's obligation to ensure a fair trial for both parties, "conducted in an orderly and expeditious manner." Hitchman v. Nagy, 382 N.J. Super. 433, 451, 889 A.2d 1066, 1077 (Super. Ct. App. Div. 2006). In the discharge of that responsibility, trial courts enjoy broad discretion in the admission or exclusion of evidence, and we review those decisions for an abuse of that discretion. Bazzano v. Killington Country Vill., Inc., 2003 VT 46, ¶ 5, 175 Vt. 534, 830 A.2d 24 (mem.) ("The reliability and relevance of the testimony [in negligence claim] was for the trial court's determination ․ [W]e discern no abuse of discretion ․"); see also Southface Condo. Owners Ass'n, v. Southface Condo Ass'n, 169 Vt. 243, 249, 733 A.2d 55, 60 (1999) ("Trial courts have broad discretion in ruling on the relevance and admissibility of evidence, reversible only for abuse of that discretion."); Haynes v. Golub Corp., 166 Vt. 228, 236, 692 A.2d 377, 381 (1997) ("The trial court has broad discretion in determining the relevance of any evidence."). To obtain reversal based upon exclusion of evidence, the evidence must have been "admissible in the then present aspect of the case." Girard v. Vt. Mut. Fire Insur. Co., 103 Vt. 330, 337, 154 A. 666, 669 (1931). Evidence is admissible if it is relevant; "[e]vidence which is not relevant is not admissible." V.R.E. 402. Relevant evidence is "evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action"—a material fact—"more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence." Id. 401. Collateral facts may be relevant if they render the existence of material facts more or less probable. Loomis v. Graves, 116 Vt. 438, 439, 77 A.2d 838, 839 (1951). The court has broad discretion in determining whether evidence is relevant. Haynes,166 Vt. at 236, 692 A.2d at 381.
¶ 21. In Brown's personal injury claim, the issues for jury determination were liability for the accident, causation, and damages. The conduct of Denis after the accident, or decisions by others about whether to prosecute or discipline him for the accident, had no bearing on the issues the jury needed to decide, which were: whether Denis was negligent in causing the accident, whether the accident caused Brown any damages and, if so, the extent of those damages. None of the excluded evidence regarding Denis's post-collision conduct in moving his vehicle, when he identified himself, or decisions regarding his prosecution had any tendency to make the facts of consequence to the jury, Denis's negligence for the accident, causation, or damages more or less probable than they would be without that evidence. The trial court was well within its discretion in excluding testimony on these matters because they were irrelevant to the issues the jury needed to decide.
III. Limitation on Voir Dire and Opening Statements
¶ 22. Having decided the evidence was to be excluded from trial testimony, it follows that prohibiting its discussion in opening statements and during voir dire was a proper exercise of the court's discretion. Opening statements provide the opportunity for a party to outline what it expects the evidence to establish. Mitchell v. Amadon, 128 Vt. 169, 175, 260 A.2d 213, 216-17 (1969) (finding that opening statement put plaintiff on notice of contributory negligence claim); see also Commonwealth v. Brown, 81 N.E.3d 1173, 1186 (Mass. 2017) ("The purpose of an opening statement is to outline in a general way the nature of the case which the counsel expects to be able to prove or support by evidence." (quotation omitted)). It is used to inform the jury in a general way of the nature of the action and the defense so that they may better understand the evidence. Winter v. Unaitis, 123 Vt. 372, 374, 189 A.2d 547, 549 (1963).4 Thus, opening statements should discuss the issues pertinent to the proceedings, based upon anticipated admissible evidence, not matters the jury will not be called upon to consider or decide or involving evidence a party knows will not be admissible. Oller v. Hicks, 441 P.2d 356, 360-61 (Okla. 1967) (intentional reference in opening statement to inadmissible evidence may be grounds for mistrial where prejudice cannot be cured by jury instruction).
¶ 23. The purpose of voir dire is to enable the parties to have a jury comprised of fair and impartial persons who can be free from bias. See e.g., McCormack v. Rutland Hosp., Inc., 2013 VT 59, ¶ 16, 194 Vt. 242, 79 A.3d 864 ("It is beyond cavil that juror bias deprives parties of a fair trial."); State v. Bruno, 2012 VT 79, ¶¶ 29-30, 192 Vt. 515, 60 A.3d 310 (explaining the court's prerogative to empanel fair and impartial jury in criminal context); State v. Percy, 156 Vt. 468, 480, 595 A.2d 248, 255 (1990) ("The purpose of a voir dire examination is to raise alleged bias from the realm of speculation to the realm of fact."(quotations and alteration omitted)). Control of the nature and scope of voir dire rests with the sound discretion of the trial judge and decisions regarding the conduct of voir dire will be reversed only when it has been shown the trial judge abused his or her discretion. McCormack, 2013 VT 59, ¶ 15 (reviewing for abuse of discretion trial court's decisions not to hold evidentiary hearing and denying motion for new trial for failure to show juror bias); Parker v. Hoefer, 118 Vt. 1, 5, 100 A.2d 434, 438 (1953) ("The nature and extent of the inquiries which may be made in the preliminary examination of jurymen is largely within the discretion of the trial court, and the exercise of its discretion will not be revised except in cases of its abuse."); Fowlie v. McDonald, Cutler & Co., 85 Vt. 438, 444, 82 A. 677, 680 (1912) ("It is undoubtedly true that the course and extent of an examination on the voir dire is largely within the discretion of the trial court."). Because the trial court appropriately excluded the evidence, discussion of it with potential jurors served no purpose in exposing any potential juror bias and the trial court properly refused to allow any inquiry into those areas during voir dire. The prohibition of discussion of these issues with potential jurors did not result in a tainted jury; permitting discussion of information having nothing to do with the case with potential jurors may well have.
IV. Evidentiary Rulings
¶ 24. Brown also contests several specific evidentiary rulings regarding: Denis's late disclosure that his dog was in the backseat of his car during the accident; the admission of Denis's photos of the accident scene; evidence of Denis's personal speed experiment; and the exclusion of the transcript from Brown's 911 call. Brown maintains that these rulings resulted in prejudice against her and that, as such, a mistrial is the proper remedy.
¶ 25. Brown claims the court should have declared a mistrial on its own motion when she first learned of the presence of a dog in Denis's truck during opening statements. She asserts she was unfairly and prejudicially surprised by the disclosure of this information at trial. This claim suffers from a number of shortcomings. First, Brown did not move for a mistrial at the time of learning the information, or at other times during the trial when she claims other improper evidentiary rulings were made, because she wanted to see what other information, if any, had been withheld. We have long recognized a party may not gamble on a favorable verdict before urging prejudicial conduct as grounds for a mistrial, which was what her wait-and-see tactic constituted. See Rash v. Waterhouse, 124 Vt. 476, 477-78, 207 A.2d 130, 131-32 (1965) ("If questions as to the prejudicial effect of unchallenged testimony need not be raised until the close of evidence, litigation could be rendered uncertain, inconclusive and punitively protracted. A party who allowed inadmissible evidence to come in without objection could gain an unconscionable advantage."). Brown purposefully did not move for a mistrial when she learned of the dog's presence; now she alleges she was prejudiced by the late disclosure. However, a trial court may not be put in error by a point not raised below. Harrington v. Decker, 134 Vt. 259, 261, 356 A.2d 511, 512 (1976). Brown's argument that the court should have declared a mistrial without her request that it do so is unavailing. State v. Curtis, 145 Vt. 552, 553-54, 494 A.2d 143, 144-45 (1985).
¶ 26. Further, to be entitled to a mistrial, the party requesting it must show she has been prejudiced. Rash, 124 Vt. at 477-78, 207 A.2d at 132. Brown claims prejudice but does not put forth any basis to support the claim. The dog could not testify and thus is different from an undisclosed witness. Brown asserts the State deliberately withheld the information concerning the presence of the dog in Denis's vehicle, but she does not show any discovery response that was incorrect. Although she might have learned of the dog had she deposed Denis, she did not take his deposition. She further alleges the State's independent medical examiner presented false evidence about how he learned about the dog, but she does not show why the medical examiner's information about the dog was material to his medical examination. There is nothing to support her assertions that evidence about the dog was deliberately withheld, was falsified, or prejudiced her in any way.
¶ 27. Finally, the State attempted to use Denis's action in rolling down the window for his dog as an explanation for why his car went forward, apparently in an effort to establish a lack of negligence on his part. The jury returned a verdict finding the State liable for the accident, thereby rejecting the defense that Denis was not negligent. This further demonstrates the lack of prejudice concerning her late discovery of the dog.
¶ 28. Any of these reasons standing alone would be sufficient to defeat a claim of error for failing to declare a mistrial relating to the disclosure of the dog. There was no basis for a mistrial.
¶ 29. Brown asserts the court made two erroneous evidentiary rulings in favor of the State, which she claims denied her a fair trial. The trial court properly exercised its discretion in both instances. Bazzano, 2003 Vt. 46, ¶ 5 (explaining that trial courts enjoy broad discretion in admission or exclusion of evidence, and those decisions are reviewed for abuse of that discretion).
¶ 30. The first ruling concerns the admission of three photographs of the vehicles involved in the collision, which were taken by Denis on his cell phone. At the time of trial, Denis had copies of the pictures but no longer had possession of the cell phone. Brown claims the photos should not have been admitted because: they are hearsay; they were not properly authenticated; and, because the absence of the cell phone on which the photos were originally taken resulted in the destruction of the evidence, the photos do not qualify as duplicates. First, the hearsay objection was not raised below and accordingly it is waived.5 In re Hale Mountain Fish & Game Club, Inc., 2014 VT 54, ¶ 18, 197 Vt. 217, 103 A.3d 890. Second, the photographs were properly authenticated through Denis's testimony that they truly and accurately represented the vehicles. Nothing further was required to authenticate them; they were admissible. State v. Colby, 139 Vt. 475, 476, 431 A.2d 462, 464 (1981). Brown's objection based on the absence of the cell phone upon which the photos were originally taken is essentially a best evidence objection, presumably that the phone represents the best evidence. The absence of the cell phone does not render the photos inadmissible under Vermont's best evidence rule, V.R.E. 1002, which makes it clear that the best evidence rule does not apply to situations where a photograph is used to illustrate the testimony of a witness. Reporter's Notes, V.R.E. 1002. Denis testified he did not observe any damage to the vehicles; the photos merely illustrated of that testimony and did not have independent legal significance.6 The photographs were properly admitted.
¶ 31. The court also admitted Denis's testimony concerning his speed experiment, conducted sometime after the accident, during which he attempted to replicate the accident to determine his vehicle's estimated speed. To do so, Denis took his foot off the brake of his truck in a parking lot and gauged the truck's moving speed once it had traveled what he estimated to be the distance between the two cars on that day. Opinion testimony by lay witnesses is admissible if rationally based on the witness's perception and helpful to a clear understanding of the testimony or determination of a fact in issue. V.R.E. 701. Denis's opinion was based upon his observations at the time of the accident and at the time he conducted his experiment. His opinion as to impact speed was relevant to the issues of both causation and damages. The court was well within its discretion in admitting this testimony.
¶ 32. Brown also challenges the exclusion of the 911 tape of her call to the police. The trial transcript does not show the tape was ever offered into evidence. Having failed to offer the evidence, this claim is not properly before this court for review and we do not consider it further. State v. Hooper, 151 Vt. 42, 45-46, 557 A.2d 880, 881-82 (1988). In sum, Brown's evidentiary challenges are meritless.7
V. Denial of New Trial Motion
¶ 33. Finally, Brown maintains the trial court abused its discretion in denying her motion for a new trial. In her motion, Brown renewed her evidentiary objections discussed above and alleged that the court's jury instructions regarding the injuries sustained she in the accident were incorrect, amounting to an abuse of discretion. Denials of motions for a new trial are reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard. In reviewing the denial of a motion for a new trial under Vermont Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a), we have stated that "[t]he law favors upholding jury verdicts," and that the decision to grant or deny a motion for a new trial is committed to "the sound discretion of the trial court." Shahi v. Madden, 2008 VT 25, ¶ 14, 183 Vt. 320, 949 A.2d 1022. Accordingly, "[w]e will reverse the trial court's decision [on such a motion] only where, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we conclude that there has been an abuse of discretion." J.A. Morrissey, Inc., 2010 VT 66, ¶ 9.
¶ 34. First, Brown's reliance on the evidentiary rulings to which she objected provides no basis for a new trial. Her argument in support of a new trial, to the extent it relies upon the court's evidentiary rulings, merely reiterates the same objections to the same rulings. The court's evidentiary rulings were correct.
¶ 35. Second, we address Brown's concerns regarding the jury instructions. The court provided counsel with a copy of proposed jury instructions at an early stage in the trial. The proposed instructions included one on aggravation of a pre-existing injury. During trial, Brown testified that the accident had not aggravated any prior injury, but that she had sustained a new injury. Following Brown's testimony, and with the agreement of counsel, the court deleted its aggravation of a pre-existing condition and charged the jury without that instruction. Following the instructions, there was no objection by counsel to its exclusion. The case was submitted to the jury using special interrogatories.
¶ 36. During deliberations, the jury sent a question to the judge as follows: "Should we be considering question 2 (cause) if we think this is a reaggravation of a previous injury?" After conferring with counsel, and with their assent, the court responded to the jury's question as follows:
If you answer question 1 "yes," you must answer question 2.
The plaintiff is not claiming that defendant's negligence aggravated any previous injury.
The plaintiff's claim is that defendant's negligence caused the injuries she testified to and that those injuries were new.
If you find that the plaintiff has proved her claim by a preponderance of the evidence, then you must answer question 2 "yes."
If you find that the plaintiff has not proved her claim, you must answer question 2 "no."
No objection was made to the court's response, and the jury continued deliberating. The jury subsequently answered question 2 "no," and the court entered judgment for the State.
¶ 37. In her new trial motion, Brown claimed there was no evidence of any prior injury and thus there could be no evidence of any aggravation of an old injury. She insisted the only evidence of injury from the accident was evidence of a new injury. In denying the motion, the trial court noted the testimony of the State's medical expert, Dr. Backus, that it was unlikely Brown sustained any new injury in the 2012 accident and that the structural abnormalities seen in a post-accident MRI were likely the result of the natural aging process. He further testified there was no indication the abnormalities impinged or compressed any nerves to cause any pain or numbness. The court found this testimony from Dr. Backus, which did not rely on Brown's pre-accident medical condition, to be sufficient for the jury to find no injury had been caused in the 2012 accident. The court acknowledged the competing testimony from Brown and her medical experts, but found it was the jury's role to resolve conflicting testimony and credibility issues. The court also noted the lack of any objection by Brown to the jury charge as given constituted a waiver of any claim that the jury was charged incorrectly.
¶ 38. Brown fails to demonstrate that the trial court abused its discretion in denying her new trial motion. A showing of an abuse of discretion requires establishing the court either totally withheld its discretion or exercised it on clearly untenable or unreasonable grounds. Turner v. Roman Catholic Diocese, 2009 VT 101, ¶ 10, 186 Vt. 396, 987 A.2d 960. The trial court's decision denying her motion was thorough, properly considered the evidence in support of the verdict, and explained its reasoning well. The court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial. Beyond that, the record reveals the trial court was assiduous in carrying out its responsibility to ensure both parties were afforded a fair trial in the first instance.
FOR THE COURT:
1. Brown asserted a Confrontation Clause violation, which the trial court denied, finding it inapplicable in a civil context. She has not renewed that argument on appeal.
2. Article 7 reads: "That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community, and not for the particular emolument or advantage of any single person, family, or set of persons, who are a part only of that community; and that the community hath an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right, to reform or alter government, in such manner as shall be, by that community, judged most conducive to the public weal." Vt. Const. art. 7.
3. The three elements necessary to a constitutional tort claim under Article 7 are distinct from the three-step analysis we employ when evaluating whether a statute violates the Common Benefits Clause. See Baker, 170 Vt. at 212-14, 744 A.2d at 877-89 (discussing analysis of the Common Benefits Clause under Article 7).
4. A similar purpose is served by V.R.C.P. 47(f), which allows the court to give preliminary jury instructions "as to the respective claims of the parties and as to such other matters as will aid the jury in comprehending the trial procedure and in understanding the evidence."
5. Even were the court to consider the hearsay objection, a photograph is not a statement, and thus cannot be hearsay—which is an out of court statement offered for the truth of the matter asserted therein. See V.R.E. 801(c); United States v. Moskowitz, 581 F.2d 14, 21 (Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1978) ("[A] sketch itself ․ is not a 'statement' and therefore can no more be 'hearsay' than a photograph identified by a witness.").
6. Although not specifically articulated, the absence of the cell phone could be claimed to create a gap in the chain of custody. However, this is irrelevant when considering the admission of photographs. State v. Howe, 136 Vt. 53, 66, 386 A.2d 1125, 1132 (1978).
7. Brown claims the tape was offered but that no discussion by counsel or the court appears in the transcript because it was inaudible. The transcript does reflect some "inaudible" comments by Brown's counsel but contains nothing indicating an offer was made or any ruling given by the court. Assuming all references to the offer and any ruling thereon were "inaudible," it was incumbent upon counsel to seek to correct the record pursuant to V.R.A.P. 10(f). This was not done, and therefore there is no offer of the 911 tape in the completed record.
EATON, J.


Clarks Artisan Womens Sarasota Big Discount - 하코네 2일 코스 로프웨이(케이블카)에서 장대한 하코네의 풍경을 조망하시거나 돈보다마(일본 유리구슬)를 만드시거나 인기 카페에서 점심을 드시는 등 하코네만의 매력을 2일간 체험하실 수 있는 코스입니다.. 定休日 毎週日曜日& 第1・第3・第5月曜日 TEL 03-3251-0025 FAX 03-3256-3328 Email [email protected]. Port Manteaux churns out silly new words when you feed it an idea or two. Enter a word (or two) above and you'll get back a bunch of portmanteaux created by jamming together words that are conceptually related to your inputs. For example, enter "giraffe" and.
定休日 毎週日曜日& 第1・第3・第5月曜日 TEL 03-3251-0025 FAX 03-3256-3328 Email [email protected]. Home 製品から探す 特殊金属加工(Ti、Co-Ni). 特殊金属加工(Ti、Co-Ni) チタン・ コバルトニッケル (加工技術). USA and Global drum circle finder. Updated January 5, 2019. Database & listings of freestyle and facilitated drum circles since 1999. Easily locate a drum circle near you..


21/02/2016 · How to Shut Down the Computer in Windows 10 If you don't plan to use your PC for a while, then you could shut down (turn off) the PC. A shutdown will close all apps, sign out all users, and completely turn off the PC.... Make sure to have your Windows product key written on a piece of paper. The five minutes that it takes to get the product key could save you from having to purchase a new license for Windows 10.
Back in the Window XP era (2005), we wrote a tutorial on solving Windows crashes (How to solve Windows system crashes in minutes). This is an updated version that will make you the master of... 24/11/2016 · solved Windows 10 Games Freezing and crashing solved Aspire E15 E5-571-563B Windows 10 video crashing when playing games. solved Strange issue with Gtx980Ti on Windows 10..
The Windows 10 April 2018 Update (version 1803) has finally arrived, and it's rolling out worldwide as a free update for compatible desktops, laptops, and tablets. how to tell.if you have super clear a satellite I just reinstalled Shogun 2 on my new laptop (windows 10) but when i try to launch a battle (historical, skirmish or in a campaign) it crashed, go back on the dekstop but without any errors or message. I check on internet and try some tips (deleting scripts, check the cache, launch in administrator, in windows 7, i also reinstalled the game…).
Using Windows 10 and trying to install sniper elite 2 it saying sniper elite 2.exe stopped than I format Windows and now again it's saying same problem with all and any game I am installing which I already played on this computer.
Windows Update offers driver updates for some products; you can also usually download drivers manually from hardware manufacturers' websites. In the case of video drivers, most manufacturers don't build their own drivers, so check the websites for Nvidia or AMD, depending on the brand of your video card. If you don't have a discrete video card, visit Intel's website for new graphics drivers.
Games should play normally after upgrading to Windows 10. However, if you see display issues such as games crashing, freezing, or failing to play after updating, try the steps below. However, if you see display issues such as games crashing, freezing, or failing to play after updating, try the steps below.


text:
dave madden
The Authentic Animal
If You Need Me I'll Be Over There
The Gay Male Sleuth
Jul 16, 2019 | Books, queers | 0 comments
I didn't know he existed (Poirot being just Belgian) until I came across Drewey Wayne Gunn's The Gay Male Sleuth in Print and Film in the reference section of the Mechanics' Institute, where I'm now spending my days writing so's to steer clear from campus during my sabbatical (or clear enough: I pass campus every day I step outside).
Here's something worth noting from his opening essay on the GMS, about a specific novel he marks as the first appearance of the character type:
The novel incorporates two important patterns that would become hallmarks of the gay mystery. First, Tony [the sleuth in said novel], in the process of solving the mystery of his ex-lover's [Julian's] suicide, begins to understand more the nature of his own sexuality. […] Second, the novel is the prototype of the gay mystery as romance. As Tony uncovers the facts about Julian's life since the time that they were lovers, he discovers the key to unlocking his own emotions. […] Thus, from the beginning, gay mysteries have willfully violated Chandler's belief that a "[l]ove interest nearly always weakens a mystery story because it creates a type of suspense that is antagonistic … to the detective's struggle to solve the problem." For the gay detective, it's complementary.
I've never taught mystery fiction, knowing nothing of how they're put together, but I can imagine using that craft text of Chandler's ("Twelve Notes on the Mystery Story") and in a flash alienating any gay students I'd have and overlooking an entire subgenre of the genre.
And so suddenly this is a post about representation? But also it's a post about queering forms. So happy I stumbled across this book that showed me yet another way gay artists bestrange and bedevil the forms they work in. For more on this idea, see this great essay by playwright Jeremy O. Harris.
I Think about This Once a Week
Jul 16, 2019 | Endorsements | 1 comment
I love a joke that, while making me laugh, suddenly explodes a dozen questions in my head. The best of 30 Rock was committed to creating mysteries like this. I still miss that show.
Check It Out: My New ASMR Discovery
Jun 11, 2019 | Endorsements, Reviews | 0 comments
Let's take a look at Prasanth. He's a man in India who reviews consumer goods and more on YouTube. He places the item in front of a white posterboard display so that it seems to appear on a cloud, or in some void outside the spacetime continuum. Then he speaks off-camera into a close microphone with a touch of echo in the background, like what we imagine the voice of God sounding like.
Behold:
Prasanth has a voice like feathers strumming muted guitar strings. His plosive P's and B's are wet enough to tingle my scalp without being spitty, and his vowels are carried by this low husky rasping that for me seems requisite (hail Bob Ross, ASMR King). But the real magic of his voice is the thrumming of his half-trilled R's. It feels exactly like having your hair stroked gently, or your back scratched. I could listen to him for hours.
ASMR is as subjective as comedy, and so I don't expect you to find Prasanth soothing. But I do expect you to find him interesting. Here is a list of some of the nearly 3000 things Prasanth has reviewed:
Lakmé Curling Mascara
IKEA Titta Djur Finger Puppet
Blaue Füsse Almond Shortbread Cookies
Poached Egg on Avocado Toast at Hyatt Centric in Goa
Minute Maid Apple Juice
Yeti in My Spaghetti Game
Singapore Pamphlets
Every video is the same. The thing to be reviewed materialized on the already vacant white space. "Let's take a look at this NAME OF OBJECT," Prasanth says. Usually when it's a food item, he'll show you all the sides of the box, point out its country of origin, list many if not all of the ingredients. He'll tell you how much he paid for the item in rupees, and then say, "or uh … X dollars or so," for us Americans. He likes to read aloud some of the package copy, or in the case of his review of the Mag Magazine Board Game, he'll read a number of the playing cards inside.
He is vocal about his disappointments. The one video I have saved, and the first I discovered, is his compilation of stationery sets. The first one contains a pad of paper that looks like a USD 100 bill, but when he unwraps the thing he sees that only the cover is the 100, the rest of the papers are blank white. Later, a pen that has a plastic flipping hourglass at the top has only enough sand to count about 3 seconds. "That's a little disappointing," he says, and points out it would be great if it were more like a minute,
Still he gives it 5 hearts at the end, and he says what he always says: "Quite nice. Check it out."
Then he reviews a plastic Disney's Frozen slingshot with a pencil sharpener inside.
Prasanth never uses the term ASMR in his videos, though his bio page admits that his videos are a good cure for insomnia. While there are now links to purchase the items reviewed (there didn't use to be), the point of the videos seems less a public service and more a kind of David Byrnean art project. Prasanth seems not to have found a consumer good he didn't find Quite Nice, and as somebody with anxieties about rampant consumerism there's almost an exposure therapy effect of these videos: I'm made to accept, and in short time to wonder, about all the pointless crap the world creates.
Plus, Prasanth's enthusiasm for the world's goods comes with a voice and tone that sounds flatly dead in the YouTubiverse of young pretty folks being all up in the camera and Just So Excited To Show You This Thing Today Guys! He never exhorts. He doesn't ask us for anything, but only to Check It Out.
So Check It Out.
Acting vs. Passing
Jun 6, 2019 | queers | 1 comment
At the Nixon Library, doing my best
A followup post to the one the other day on Imposter Syndrome. Posing and pretending got me thinking about acting, and how I'm bad at acting, and how I'm afraid of it. If you ever want to get me the worst gag gift, sign me up for an improv class and make me enroll.
What's scary about acting is being wrong or not being believed. It's attempting the proper accent and sounding instead like I've got marbles in my mouth, or saying sad words in so wooden a way the audience laughs. Adorable. Oh, look! He's trying to be somebody else but he's really only always himself.
In other words, the scary thing about acting is other people dismissing my hubris or delusion. That too-big-for-his-britches quality. Which brings to mind the closet. In truth, I acted like a straight man for more than half my life, and the latent feeling I had during that performance was always: Am I doing this right? What if they find out?
Every time I got called a faggot, there was a critic panning my performance.
Lately, I've been thinking about acting not as a thing certain handsome people do on stage, but as a thing we all do when we leave the house. I act the part of a writer most mornings, and then I act the part of an MFA program director (me! they actually gave this job to me!) and then I act the part of a teacher, and then I go home and act the part of a loving partner. We all have roles to play, with different scripts and settings and sometimes even costumes.
But further, I've been thinking about acting in opposition to passing, given "active"'s opposition to "passive"—in voice, in sex, in everywhere.
You can pass as anything. Most people's experiences with passing is when somebody comes up to you at a store and asks you where the restrooms are, or the kosher salt. "Uh, I don't work here," you go. Passing involves appearing to be somebody else when you're not even trying, when you're just being yourself. Passing creates an audience outside of any performance.
I love passing. I have thought so much about strategic passing I even wrote about it in an essay for The Normal School (on, tellingly, impersonations). I love passing because I love boundaries and borders. Anytime a line in the sand gets drawn I want to stand right on it. I want to be the one person who gets to cross, because taking sides means giving something up. Some freedom maybe.
Passing, though, is passive. It lies low, on the DL, while other people make assumptions and suppositions. And in queer communities (urban ones, mostly) it's Not Cool. Passing as straight, or cisgendered, implies that you're trying to pass, because you're ashamed of being queer.
I think about my friend Clutch, who once told me about the street harassment they get as a trans person. "It's always guys," they said, "and they always think I'm trying to pass, and like, doing a bad job." Clutch embraces their trans identity. They only date trans people, etc. So it's shitty, the experience, but also confusing—like somebody coming up to you at a store and criticizing what they think is your work uniform.
Another dichotomy at work here: expressing vs. impressing. When people exhort you to express yourself, there's always this feeling of authenticity and truth. You do you, gurl. Or people who insist they write to "express themselves." Expressing is active, and acting is expressing, even if what's expressed is a pose, a lie.
Impressing is passive, in that I can't act to impress you. You are the audience, the arbiter, of whether to be impressed by me. And when I look at these I see how much I love being impressed by people. When I meet new people, all I want to do is ask them dozens of questions. I like to follow a conversation, at a distance, more than I like to play my part in it.
Where am I going with all this? I've got some developing ideas that posing and artifice is, paradoxically, the way toward an authentic life. In three more weeks I'll begin a 1-year break from having to perform two key roles in my life: program director and professor. I feel I've done a poor job keeping up the roles of writer and partner (and friend, and brother, and son) lately. Those guys need more plotlines, more time in front of the camera.
On Imposter Syndrome
Jun 4, 2019 | Teaching | 0 comments
The first thing I wrote for myself, not for class, that wasn't a diary entry, was a poem I composed using my mother's typewriter at the age of 11:
In my world everyone is a friend.
The most happiest times never end.
I'll lie there at the break of dawn
Watching the fun of a little fawn.
Take me to the world of dreams,
Away from all the fights,
Away from all the screams.
The second thing I wrote for myself, not for class, was a poem I typed on a computer my dad got us when I was 12 or 13. I don't recall the linebreaks, so here it is, to the best of my memory, in prose:
Being an adolescent is not as easy as you think. You don't understand what I'm going through, 'cause all you do is drink. The pain, the problems, the pressure. It's too much for me to bear. The confusion and the choices. It's like you just don't care. It pisses me off the way you think adolescence is such a blast. You just don't understand it all, so kiss my little ass.
That first poem was written out of wish fulfillment: I wanted the other kids to be nicer to me and for my life to go more easily. The second poem was written differently. One day in my English class, I saw on the wall a poem by Bryan Billington, a boy in the grade above mine who was once on my basketball team and who my sister had a crush on. Bryan Billington's poem was so mad at a father who was so terrible. I was shocked that people our age could say such things on paper, and by the end of the poem I felt something of the catharsis the speaker went through. I was so impressed by it, and I wanted to make such a poem, too, in the hopes that I might impress somebody, so I imagined what it must be like to grow up, as I did not, with an alcoholic, abusive father, and I tried my best to write what Bryan Billington had already written.
The semester just ended a couple weeks ago. In my workshop, I tried to talk about risk and vulnerability in nonfiction, and a number of my students talked openly about Imposter Syndrome: they feel often like they're posing or pretending as writers. My response was, unhelpfully, Join the club.
I've spent 15 years now pretending to be a writer, posing as one, the way I started writing back when I was 13. I've worked hard to read very closely what other successful, published writers are doing, what they are making that's getting attention, and trying to replicate that in something I've made in the hopes that I might get similar attention.
Attention is the heart of it. When you're the youngest kid in a family, attention is gold. You spend hours each day digging around for it, sniffing out where you might find even just a pebble-sized speck of it. And when you do find it, you raise it up in the air and kick your heels together in delight.
In college, I had friends who wrote, who were officially in Creative Writing Classes, and who got to give readings at coffee shops in town. Wouldn't that be fun? I'd grown up somehow to believe I was special, different, probably better than most kids, and that I deserved a life befitting such a special person. But I couldn't act. And I couldn't sing well. Writing seemed my only shot at escaping the fate of never being noticed.
So: I've been an imposter for 15 years, working on books and publishing a couple of them, getting up most mornings to write more of a draft, or revise another one—yet what else does a writer do? What else makes a Real Writer than getting up and writing most days? What I was tacitly packing into my "Join the club" response was this feeling: All this time I've been doing the work of writing, of being a writer, and at every moment I've been waiting for a student, or a critic, or a peer to call me out on it. You're only pretending to be one of us. You don't actually have any talent, drive, or vision.
Imposter Syndrome. It was their word for it.
Imposter Syndrome is a trap the mind makes. That trap is the basis for David Foster Wallace's "Good Old Neon", which remains my favorite of his stories, because nobody else has done as good a job rendering the contours of this experience. One way out of the trap is learning that no one—foremost none of those imaginary people waiting to call me out on being a fraud—can pin down with any certainty what authenticity entails.
In other words: We all fake it until we make it.
But here, remembering my earliest writing, I've found another way out of the trap. I've always thought that I began posing as a writer since the first thing I ever wrote, but that's not true. It's only the first thing I ever wrote on a computer. The real first poem, the one I wrote on Mom's typewriter, came from somewhere different than the big lie about my dad.
"In My World" was unoriginal doggerel that nevertheless put forward a vision I had of making the world a better place. It came out of what I felt, and what I wanted. And now, every time I stand in front of a classroom, and I pull out of my ass something to say that I hope sounds smart enough to ward off the pending mutiny I'm always afraid is afoot, and every time I delete a sentence I've written because I imagine some future reader calling me out for ripping off Wallace, or Unferth, or Nelson, or Koestenbaum, I think back of the first time I tried to make a piece of writing, and I remember that if I'm posing, all I'm trying to pose as is that kid, wanting the world to be better and more beautiful.
Very Good Paragraphs – Self-Critique Edition
Apr 24, 2019 | Very Good Paragraphs | 0 comments
This bit from Jon Baskin's NYRB review of Wesley Yang's The Souls of Yellow Folk left me looking hard at myself and recognizing finally, in words, something I'd felt creeping up on me but not feeling able to name (emphasis mine):
That the final articles in Souls, as well as some Yang has written for the liberal-centrist Tablet since the book went to press, criticize aspects of these [i.e. neo-socialist, post-Bernie] movements—a development that has disappointed some of his former admirers—may be seen as indicating an underlying consistency: where before he had resisted, from the perspective of the "singular" individual, the flattening out of social life into a series of market-based transactions, today Yang opposes the "politiciz[ation] of everyday life" on similar grounds. But it also suggests a characteristic dilemma for those who came of age when authenticity was experienced predominantly as a personal, rather than a political, possibility. To learn to measure all against the barometer of the "hard and unyielding" self is to come to distrust the demands of unified groups and movements, no matter how well meaning. For every "movement" revolves around a set of orthodoxies that will be unacceptable to one habituated to defiance.
It me, as the kids online say. Being true to thine own self feels less like a virtue in these times of oppression.
Very Good Paragraphs
Came across this one, from one of Kafka's letters, in the introduction to the Penguin Classics edition of Sade's The 120 Days of Sodom:
If the book we are reading does not wake us, as with a fist hammering on our skull, why then do we read it? So that it shall make us happy? Good God, we would also be happy if we had no books, and such books as make us happy we could, if need be, write ourselves. But what we must have are those books which come upon us like ill-fortune, and distress us deeply, like the death of one we love better than ourselves, like suicide. A book must be an ice-axe to break the sea frozen inside us.
I love how this starts out as contentious and misanthropic and then swerves to end on something akin to salvation and hope.
I've got more to say on Sade's book, but for a future post. For now this quote's going on the wall of my office.
Anticipatory Song
Apr 12, 2019 | music, tabulature | 0 comments
I'm reading these days about the history of opera, specifically the fall of the castrati and rise of the soprano, and thus the aria, and I remembered this, which I wrote in 1994:
That's a scan from our high school's literary magazine. I'm proud of this thing, and I like—playing it for the first time in 25 years via musical typing on Garageband—that I chose C minor, of all keys. I also find it very funny. The dynamics!
Title is probably an homage to Camper Van Beethoven's "Ambiguity Song". Anyway, this is what a high school junior does when he's afraid of drugs and sex.
In Defense of Briefs
Apr 11, 2019 | Endorsements | 0 comments
I've been watching a lot of Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee these days, and one thing Jerry Seinfeld likes to ask his male guests is what kind of underwear they wear. Many of them say briefs, and Jerry always goes, "Briefs?!" with that incredulous tone we all know him for.
Then he takes a moment to teach his guest about boxer briefs, and how they are superior, and more adult.
His guests never tell him how he's wrong.
They always just laugh and aw-shucks themselves onward in the conversation. The reason for this might be that they haven't formulated the argument. Most briefs wearers might only know briefs. They began in them and then continued. But I began in briefs, got shamed into boxers in gym class locker rooms, discovered boxer briefs while working at Old Navy, and ultimately went back to briefs after coming out.
Because briefs are sexy.
Two things that are true about briefs:
The pouch of briefs wraps fully around the scrotum, which prevents it from sticking damply to the thigh, and so you never have to do that extra wide step thing you see boxer-briefers do to unstick the scrotum from the thigh.
Most men look better in boxer briefs than they do in briefs. But still not great. Most of us aren't underwear models. But any man who looks good in boxer briefs looks better in briefs.
Briefs.
I mean the word alone…!
The Feelings Cafeteria
Apr 10, 2019 | Obvious Things, Reviews | 1 comment
I thought to title this "The Feelings Factory", but social media isn't a feelings factory, exactly, in that feelings are manufactured in our minds and bodies. Social media is more a place you go to get something you don't have or can't make right now. A Feelings Cafeteria? Let's go with The Feelings Cafeteria.
Here's where this post is coming from:
The characteristic that best describes the difference between people at various points on the scale[*] is the degree to which they are able to distinguish between the feeling process and the intellectual process. Associated with the capacity to distinguish between feelings and thoughts is the ability to choose between having one's functioning guided by feelings or by thoughts. The more entangled and intense the emotional atmosphere a person grows up in, the more their life becomes governed by their own and other people's feeling responses.
It's from a book on family psychology (Kerr & Bowen's Family Evaluation) I've been reading for research, and the moment I came across it I could only think of Twitter—replacing, that is, one's family of origin with one's online "fam".
The science of it may be wrong and off, in that one is not raised at formative stages over years by one's Twitter fam, but the comparison feels apt to me. I would call social media an intense emotional atmosphere engineered to get one entangled. And opening Twitter while bored or between life events, I've very quickly felt that my life had become governed by other people's feeling responses.
I've felt that people online are usually feeling and not thinking. I didn't judge them for it. (Or I tried not to but I'm coming off a couple decades where judging others has been the only thing that makes me feel secure.) I saw that one of the gifts of social media, besides its manufacturing the feeling of social connections, is how amid the dull periods of one's life it can provide some emotional simulation.
That emotion is usually rage or disgust, but it's still a stimulation.
Like with certain books or activist language, I felt it wasn't the right place for me to engage in the world—politically or otherwise—because I'm feeling dozens of things about the world already, and I'd like to think through some stuff to help. And while posts might link to places where thinking is happening, wading through the mess of social media to find those links is like looking for a sunny spot to read and heading to a protest rally.
Twitter is a place where I can't think—where I think thinking is discouraged. I've felt this for months, and so what a discovery in my reading yesterday to see some psychology about why this is so.
Is one reason why more and more I can't be there.
i.e., the "scale of differentiation", which is Bowen's admittedly arbitrary way to measure the degree to which someone has emotionally separated from their family of origin (and therefore become a more distinct self).↵
MFALand
Obvious Things
queers
tabulature
© 2019 Dave Madden. All rights reserved.