Welcome to the Stifyn Emrys blog. Visit this site to stay updated on the latest news and releases from author Stifyn Emrys, along with serious, silly and occasionally sarcastic observations about the world around us.
"The Death of Me" is a true story, a memoir of the author's ordeal after her husband is severely burned in a plane crash. It's a vividly personal and deeply affecting account that illustrates how wrenching and harrowing the process of grieving can be - especially when you don't know whether to grieve or not. Or what to grieve.
Denise doesn't pull any punches in describing the self-doubt, anger and uncertainty she felt while her husband lay helpless in a hospital bed. She questions her decisions, her faith and her own motives. She talks about the challenges of being there for a husband who's seldom conscious and not being there at times for her children when they needed her.
At a certain point in the story, she begins to insert flashbacks to her life with her husband before the accident. This was a wonderful touch, as it helped the reader connect with the essence of their intense, yet entirely human (and sometimes strained) relationship. As I was reading this, I found myself wishing she had inserted more of these flashbacks earlier in the narrative, but I think I understand why she structured it as she did, and that decision may well reflect her own state of mind as she was going through this nightmare. If so, it is deftly done.
This is a story of the grieving process. If you've ever felt stuck in a situation that doesn't seem to get better but still offers the slightest, elusive hope of a happy ending, you will be able to relate to this book. Whether you are grieving a loved one, a relationship or anything else on the precipice of death, you will be able to relate to this.
I can't personally imagine how Denise wrote this book, and she herself has called it the hardest thing she's ever written. Her emotional honesty gives it a raw feeling that draws the reader through to the end (it's short at 9,000 words, and I read it in a single sitting). I don't think I could have brought myself to revisit such pain, but the author does us a huge service by doing so here. She produces a book many readers will be able relate to on an emotional level, even if the events themselves are far more awful than what many of us will ever face.
Yes, it's the story of grieving, but it's also a story of love - not fairy tale love with knights in shining armor and happily-ever-afters, but the real love of one flawed, confused yet determined human being for another. It's a story about human limits and how love can help us transcend those limits: about how it's always sufficient and, yet, sometimes, isn't quite enough.
Tucker Carlson apologized on Fox & Friends Weekend today for a comment made about Wiccans last weekend, saying he never intended to offend. "I also violated one of my basic life rules, which is 'live and let live,'" he said on the Fox News program. "The Wiccans have never bothered me or tried to control my life. I should have left them alone. Sorry about that."
_________________________________________ "I am really only interested in new information, not freelance opinion. I don't really care what you think off the top of your head." - Tucker Carlson
Actually, that goes both ways.
It’s a
no-brainer that Wiccans and Pagans would be offended by the diatribe/mockery of
them that aired on Fox News this week. But they’re not the only groups likely
to take offense at this three-minute pastiche of bigotry, inaccuracy and
character assassination.
In this
short span of time, the three people on this panel managed to insult midwives,
rural residents, middle-aged women, divorcees, people who burn incense,
individuals who enjoy celebrating holidays - especially Halloween - and folks
who play Dungeons & Dragons. (Considering it’s Fox News, I doubt they’d
ever speak with such disdain about that venerable symbol of free-market
capitalism, Monopoly … unless, of course, it was to criticize that new “witchy”
playing piece, the dreaded cat.)
As if all
that bias isn’t bad enough, the entire piece is a flagrant insult to another
group of individuals: journalists.
Let me be
clear about a couple of things. First, though I have a number of friends who
consider themselves Wiccan, I do not personally practice Wicca. Second, I’ve worked
my entire career - more than 25 years now - as a professional journalist. In
that time, many things have changed. There has been a gradual, yet steady
blurring of the lines between reporting and opinion. Between news and
entertainment. These days, it’s sometimes difficult to tell where one ends and
the other begins.
As visual
media sources have multiplied from the “Big Three” television networks to
thousands of cable choices and a virtually limitless number of options online, news
providers have been forced to target niches rather than try to serve a broad
spectrum of consumers. This has meant that media outlets are increasingly
targeting either liberals or conservatives (but not both). More specifically,
they’re often aiming for narrowly focused and even single-issue audiences.
This trend
both reflects and contributes to the increased political polarization we see in
the United States. Few liberals even watch Fox News anymore, so it feels it can
operate in a cocoon and say pretty much whatever it wants. To be fair, few
conservatives probably pay any attention to Bill Maher, for instance, and he
says pretty much what he wants, too. One could argue that Maher is a comedian,
but he’s also a political commentator and one of the best examples of someone
who has blurred the lines between news and entertainment.
But the
crucial point is this: The more we hang out exclusively with like-minded
individuals, the more our own opinions are reinforced and the less opportunity
we have to be challenged by opinions we may not agree with. We become so
isolated from one another that we adopt rigid ideologies that sometimes include
laundry lists of dos and don’ts. Liberals are “encouraged” through peer
pressure to adhere to a checklist of political positions, and all conservatives
are similarly “encouraged” to do the same. Deviation from the norm opens the
individual up to ridicule, derision or shocked holier-than-thou reactions.
In the interest of full disclosure, I should
state that I’m an unabashed liberal on most issues. But not on all. I actually
happen to agree with critics who say liberals have a tendency to be too
politically correct. But (and this is a big but), I’m also fully convinced that
conservatives are just as badly ensnared by political correctness as liberals
are. Probably more so, because conservative philosophy, by its very nature,
seeks to maintain the status quo, whereas liberals and progressives seek to …
well … progress beyond it.
I found it
interesting - and comical - that Fox’s Wicca-bashing segment was marked with
the tagline “P.C. Police,” as in politically correct. The implication is that
Fox’s staff was diligently tracking down and exposing political correctness. Nothing,
however, could be further from the truth. In fact, the biased commentary that
followed couldn’t have possibly been more
politically correct to Fox’s audience. It hit all the right buttons: the supposed
sanctity of marriage (in its ridicule of divorcees), upholding the conservative
concept of American “tradition,” patriarchal bias (in its derision toward
midwives and women in general), and its mockery of all minority traditions.
I’ve come to
expect this sort of bias from Fox News. It’s part-and-parcel of the modern
media strategy of “preaching to the choir” - or, in other words, being politically
correct. The segment is, tellingly, called Fox
& Friends. In other words, people who disagree with Fox’s conservative
political bent (and therefore are not “friends”) aren’t welcome … unless, of
course, they can sit through enough of the show to get hooked on one of its
sponsors’ products. Then it’s all good.
To be
perfectly honest, though, all journalism is biased for the simple reason that
all human beings are biased. Some shoot for objectivity and miss; others don’t
even bother to try. Fox generally falls into a third category: It doesn’t
bother to try, but insists that it’s actually succeeding at being “fair and
balanced.” If that’s not Orwellian, I don’t know what is.
And that
brings me to what’s even more, from a journalistic perspective, about this
segment in particular and Fox’s approach in general: its blatant disregard for
the facts.
Not 15
seconds into the segment, Tucker Carlson declares that “there are more
Zoroastrians here than there are Wiccans.” Sorry, Tucker, you just flunked your
audition for Jeopardy! In 2006, there were 11,000 Zoroastrians in the United
States. Five years earlier, according to religioustolerance.org, there were 408,000 adult Wiccans in the country.
That means, not counting children, there were 37 times as many Wiccans as there
were Zoroastrians in this country.
How absurd
is Carlson’s claim? It’s tantamount to saying West Virginia is larger, in terms
of area, than Alaska. (In fact, it’s worse: Alaska is only 27 times as large as
West Virginia).
Carlson
sticks his foot in his mouth again by twice incorrectly referring to Wicca as “Wiccanism”
(how upset would Christians be if he started calling Christianity “Jesusism”?).
Zoroastrians or Wiccans? You decide.
Clayton
Morris, another panelist on the show, later sticks his foot in his mouth by
claiming that “you get 20 holidays if you’re a Wiccan. I guess that’s the one
you’re going to go with. If you’re going to pick one, go with the one with the
most holidays.” Morris is wrong on two counts here. First, Wicca generally
recognizes eight sacred days (four major and four minor sabbats), not 20.
Second, Wicca doesn’t have the most holidays. That honor would go to Catholicism,
which pays tribute to a different saint every day of the year and even has one
day that covers all the rest - All Saints Day. Otherwise known as the day after
All Hallows Eve, or Halloween.
Carlson
evidently has a bias against Catholic holy days, since he thinks Halloween is a
joke: “Any religion whose most sacred day is Halloween I can’t take seriously,”
he declared. “I mean, call me a bigot. I’m not, you know, offering an editorial
against Wiccans.”
Come on, Mr.
Carlson, of course you are. And your comments were, in fact, bigoted. Saying
you’re not a bigot is about as convincing as declaring Fox News to be fair and
biased simply because it says it is. But if you’re going to act like a bigot, the
least you could do is get your facts straight. Wiccans do not celebrate
Halloween. They celebrate Samhain, a pre-Christian sacred day that happens to
fall on the same day.
Morris
seemed to recognize that the discussion lacked any semblance of fairness or
balance, when he remarked, “I will say this, because we are journalists and I
have covered this. … I had to do a story and I went and interviewed a number of
Wiccans. And they say look, we are the most peaceful individuals. We don’t
practice crazy things. We’re just of the Earth.”
Notice the
phrasing. First, Morris goes out of his way to assert that he and his fellow
panelists are journalists. Why? Because they sure as heck aren’t acting like
journalists. But he then goes on to contradict his assertion by inserting more
bias into the discussion by saying he “had to” do a
story on Wicca - it wasn’t something he wanted to do.
More bias
and falsehood is interjected into the discussion at various points by Tammy
Bruce (speaking on tape), Carlson and, to a lesser extent, Anna Kooiman. There’s too much of it to
address it all here, which should tell you something about exactly how packed
with derision and dismissiveness this segment was, since it was just three
minutes long.
Carlson came out with a wannabe apology a couple of days
afterward: “I don’t spend a lot
of time on Twitter, so I’m not sure of the dimensions of it, but I’m pretty
sure that I’m unpopular in the witchcraft community, and I understand why. I
probably was unduly harsh. As far as I know, most Wiccans are peaceful
taxpayers. I’ve never been mugged by one anyway. So I apologize for hurting
anyone’s feelings.”
This sounds an awful
lot like he’s covering his posterior, considering his proclamation on Fox that “the
bad side of Wiccanism is it’s obviously a form of witchcraft.” In other words,
he’s made a moral judgment (that witchcraft is something “bad”). Either 1) he
learned a lot about Wicca in the ensuing 48 hours that caused him to change his
mind, 2) his initial statement was deliberately inflammatory or 3) his apology
was disingenuous.
Personally, I’m
reminded of a ruthless TV trial lawyer who makes shockingly prejudicial
statements in front of a jury, then “withdraws” them when the opposition
objects. Sure, you can strike them from the record, but the damage is done: harsh
impressions left in a jury’s mind are not easily erased. The same principle
applies to the minds of those who tune in to watch Fox & Friends.
Compounding the issue
is the fact that, Carlson's initial apology soft-pedaled it by saying he “probably” was unduly harsh.
I’m sorry, but there’s
no “probably” about it.
The other three
panelists? To my knowledge, issued any sort of mea culpa.
The Wheel of the Year.
As of this writing,
more than 33,000 people have signed a petition calling for an on-air apology
(yes, that’s more than three times the number of Zoroastrians in the United
States). It’s worth it to hold Fox’s feet to the fire. At the same time,
however, we shouldn’t get too hopeful about the prospect of changing attitudes
by appealing to actual facts as a counterweight to Fox’s error-laden diatribes.
Facts, sadly, don’t
seem to change people’s minds. Often, they have the opposite effect. A study in
2005 and 2006 at the University of Michigan discovered an interesting
phenomenon: Misinformed people - especially political partisans - rarely
changed their minds in response to corrected facts. To the contrary, they
became even more firmly convinced of their false beliefs.
That won’t come as a
surprise to anyone who has watched the polarization and pigheaded partisanship
of American politics over the past several years. But it certainly isn’t
encouraging.
Stifyn Emrys is a
journalist, blogger and author of several books, including “The Gospel of thePhoenix” and the novel “Identity Break.” all of which are available in
paperback, Kindle and Nook formats. He burned incense as he wrote this, but he never got into D&D and he doesn't personally know any midwives. Follow him on Facebook at www.facebook.com/semrys.
I just finished this first book in Kiersten White's "Paranormalcy" series and enjoyed it immensely. The writing is crisp and keeps the story moving along at a brisk pace throughout. The flow of the book was perfect, and the tone was light and fun.
The author does a great job of capturing teenage insecurity, then transferring it to a world that's not quite our own. She doesn't just describe situations, but she really gets at Evie's feelings about everything that's going on, which is one thing that separates a great author from an average writer, in my book. Her conflicted emotions toward her adoptive mother figure seemed particularly natural and human in a very superhuman world. The tone is somewhat similar to that of the "Magic Kingdom of Landover" series by Terry Brooks, another series I thought was great: quirky, a little serious and a lot of fun, all at the same time.
The beginning of the book reminded me a lot of "Men in Black," as though the author had created a similar universe of odd other-than-human individuals, substituting paranormals for aliens. The idea that a secret undercover organization is keeping tabs on paranormals who hide right under our noses was a natural offshoot of the MIB concept, though I have no idea whether that film played any part in inspiring this series. The characters and story line here are certainly original, which quickly eliminates the feeling that White's work is in any way derivative.
The "villains" here are well-crafted. I really couldn't stand Reth - which is a good thing, because the reader isn't supposed to like him - who felt like the sort of rogue you might find in a Neil Gaiman work (done American style). Like the protagonist, I became more than annoyed at the way he never fully explained his motives. I found myself saying, "Of course she didn't go along with your plan, since you didn't bother letting her in on what it is!" Vivian was nicely drawn in that she wasn't a one-dimensional villain. You could understand her motivation for being the way she was, and like Evie, in some ways, it's possible to feel a bit sorry for her.
Lend (a character's name) is a great, sympathetic romantic interest for Evie. I enjoyed the fact that the requisite romantic interest wasn't overplayed. It wasn't some all-encompassing angst-ridden "Twilight" sort of thing; more a tender and playful tale of discovering the opposite sex. It didn't overpower the main story line, but instead complemented it well.
I'll give "Paranormalcy" a five-star review for its strong writing, well-drawn characters and effortless flair. It's a bestseller already, and it's easy to see why.
Announcing the release of my debut novel, Identity Break, now available on Kindle and CreateSpace; coming soon to Nook.
Identity Break is the first in a projected series of novels. Editor Samaire Provost - author of Mad World: Epidemic and Mad World: Sanctuary - describes it as a cross between The Twilight Zone and The Matrix. If you enjoy Samaire's work, I'm betting you'll enjoy this one. It's a fast-paced story full of twists and unexpected revelations that could be categorized as science fiction, YA or action-adventure. Here's the synopsis I wrote:
"How far would you go to find yourself?
"Imagine everything you thought you knew about yourself
turned out to be a lie, and you didn’t know who was telling the truth. Imagine
you possessed a secret so dangerous that, if it were exposed, it would reshape
the entire world.
"What would you do if that secret were your very identity?
"In almost every way, Palo Vista seems like a typical
California city, with office buildings, schools, and homes sprawled out across
suburbia, filled with families making a life for themselves at the dawn of the
new millennium. But two seniors at Mt. MacMurray High are about to find out
that nothing is as it seems. Jason Nix is a star athlete and honors student who
can’t seem to remember anything about his childhood. Elyse Van Auten is a
budding artist from a broken home whose father left her mother two years ago - or
so she’s been led to believe.
"Like most teens entering adulthood, Elyse and Jason just
want to find out who they really are. For them, however, the stakes go far
beyond their own personal quest. Join them on a journey of self-discovery that
becomes a desperate fight for survival against enemies determined to conceal
the truth … and find out what happens when that fight becomes personal."
It's 284 pages in paperback and will soon be available for Nook, as well. Get it here: