Readers of this blog know that I haven’t spared common, everyday greed for its role in the inevitable deterioration of our standard of living coming our way. . 

Still, I thought this column by Frank Rich of the New York Times adminishing average Americans for their role in the crisis, was, well, pretty rich (sorry- couldn’t help it).

Now that it seems to be fashionable to talk sacrifice and go green and scorn the mighty Starbucks, columnists are tripping over themselves looking for scapegoats and it seems, just as Time magazine infamously crowned YOU, the American Consumer, with your indomitable willingness to spend and thus make the economies of the world go round, they are now ready to bestow on YOU, now that the other shoe has dropped, a hefty chunk of blame for this mess.

That’s right - YOU. You, with your Viking ranges, your Hummers, your Victoria Secret secrets, your $40 Yankee Candles and your addiction to $5 polysyllabic coffee concoctions.

The fact that a Merrill Lynch ex-exec, John Thain, decided to expense $1.22 million of company money (right before his company qualified for bailout funds out of, ahem, your tax money) is directly correlated to YOUR greed. (Poor guy… hes was a victim of your culture of consumption. Shame on you for getting mad at him and not at yourselves).

You were hoping to make $50,000 in profits on your house when you hadn’t seen a raise in decades, when your health care costs have gone through the roof, when inflation had quintupled the cost of buying a starter home in the kind of neighborhood where you don’t have to worry about drive-by shootings and crack whores coming on to your teenage son - that’s the very same brand of ostentation that inspired John Thain to think he simply had to have a $87,000 rug for his office, or got Steven Schwarman to blow a million smacks on his 60th birthday bash (on Rod Stewart for crying out loud. Why not the New Kids while you’re at, Stevie?).

Potatoes, pot-aahtoes.

It’s not, say, because the media - who play a pivotal role in maintaining a healthy democracy as the moderators of bullshit - failed the American people by catering 1) to poltical spin, and 2) to the lowest common denominator of intelligence.

It’s easy to use “Americans” as punching bags (God knows I have), but who are “Americans”? The guys on Cops, Jerry Springer’s audience, or are they regular people with regular faults and regular strengths, people who tend to be lazy (because let’s face it - we’re wired that way) and who are not prone to heroics unless absolutely necessary. On the other hand, they are also fairly reasonable people, who, in times of relative plenty, can be made to think and plan long-term if the people watching out for them cared to make that case.

Instead of fostering critical thinking, the term “conspiracy theory” was brought into the common vernacular as a way to demean anyone - and I mean anyone - with a question, be it a legitimate question, or one that could be easily refuted. In classrooms kids are brought up to think that there’s no such thing as a stupid question, but as soon as they enter the adult world they’re expected to figure out which questions are “safe” and which aren’t. Like for example debating the pros and cons of controlled protectionism (so jobs at home can be protected), or the economics of growth altogether (as in, we should not be banking on relocating to Mars in case our “growth” outpaces the planet’s resources). These are all baaaaaad questions, so shame on you for even thinking them.

Well, I’m going to go out on a limb here and say to Mr. Rich that the people’s “greed” was planned, enabled and magnified by design, not by accident. After 9/11 we were told it was our patriotic duty to shop. Bush wasn’t lying when he said so - in an economy where 70% of the GDP is accounted for by consumer spending, of course we need to shop to keep it going.

When free market theory was invoked to justify manufacturing jobs being shipped off to China, India and others, the American people roared. I remember - I was a teenager in the 1990s and I remember the campaigns to “buy American”. I especially remember that one of my favorite shops - BCBG - was proud of its “Made in America” label (and used it to justify its crazy prices). I also remember than in 2004, scarcely 10 years after the “Made in America” campaign, I ordered a Marc Jacobs dress through ebay and was convinced I’d gotten a fake when it arrived in the mail - the label said “Made in China”. How could that be? It absolutely could be, it turns out. Most American  - and many European - designers have moved production to China. Nobody cares where it’s made anymore, and that, boys and girls, is how North America lost its status as the manufacturer of “quality” goods, after ceding the manufacturing of cheap crap to the Far East.

And now we’re set to lose our white collar jobs as well. Just last week, a bank which operates mostly in the Cayman Islands - not part of the US but culturally and economically intertwined with it - has shipped off a sizeable chunk of its operations to India, where accountants are just as nimble with numbers and cost half as much as accountants with American, Canadian, or British qualifications.

So what are people supposed to do? Go back to school? And do what, exactly? The NYT also reported, in its business section, that enrollment in trucking and welding school is up, as people seek “recession-resistant” careers.

What next? A resurgence in horse-and-buggy renting? A demand for scribes as we inch towards illiteracy? Why do our economies seem to be going backwards, and why are we so unprepared? Can that be blamed on the common greed of the American consumer too?

I’ll leave you with this thought, one I’ve blogged about before and have never managed to get over: the median HOUSEHOLD income in the US is around$25,000.

That means there are around 150,000,000 souls living in America today whose household income is $25,000 or less.

Or less!

When the median purchase price of a home in the US tops $200,000 and the median income is $25,000, and 50,000,000 Americans don’t have health insurance, can we really place the blame for the reckless defrauding of American prosperity at the doorstep of the “average” American consumer?

Frank Rich - what the hell are you talking about???

In the opening chapter of my current work-in-progress, I was toying with the idea of having a character (a designer) describe his latest collection as “Slumdog Chic”, in reference of course to the runaway anti-Bollywood hit Slumdog Millionnaire. The collection is a sort of bum-as-the-new-black meets Indian slums, which I admit is a little insensitive and exploitative of the tragic plight of so many people (and so is a perfect metaphor for insensitive consumption), but Marie-Claire does me one better with their February cover.

Behold the new chic - Credit Crunch Chic.

Cash-strapped? About to be foreclosed on? Stuck in a loveless marriage because your assets are now worth less than a month’s supply of kitty-litter and now you can’t move out?

Boy does Marie-Claire have a deal for you! YSL has “downsized” its “no-frills, discreetly chic Easy bag” (presumably so the under-fed, over-stretched masses don’t pull a Marie-Antoinette on your ass and stuff the YSL “Easy” bag down your throat).

Suggested retail price for this bit of inconspicuous under-consumption?

$995.

There’s even a cheaper version for you SUPER bargain huntresses out there: $895.

No wonder this economy thing hasn’t bottomed out yet: we still don’t get it. Or maybe, we do get but Marie-Claire et al. think it’s a matter of time before we’re fed up with being sensible and go back to free-spending ways.

What do you think?

When I saw Jill Biden’s gorgeous red strapless frock, I thought it might be a Ralph Lauren. Jill - whom I’d read about in Vogue a few months back - seems like the poster girl for East Coast, summering-in-the-Cape American glitteratti. So imagine my surprise when I find out Jill is wearing none other than Reema Acra, Lebanese designer to high society ladies. Is the shift from tired, old political and economic ideas going to run parallel to a shift away from established designers, towards a more glodal, inclusive vision where America is no longer in a class by itself but part of the mosaic of world cultures?

We shall see.

In the meantime, here’s Reem’s bio (I am totally digging that she and my dad attended the same University… the AUB was the first University campus I’d ever seen and its gorgeous, sprawling green spaces would become the benchmark by which I judged campuses when it was my turn to go to college. The AUB is probably responsible for my hated for Concordia’s bleak, grey “urban campus” ).

From Reem’s website:

Influenced by her mother’s impeccable style and love of fashion, Reem was always fascinated by design. As a little girl, she accompanied her mother to fabric stores to learn about the finest fabrics, textures and design details such as hand-embroidery that would later become signature elements of her iconic style. As Reem grew up, her passion for design continued to evolve and she began designing dresses for herself, which were brought to life by her personal couturier.
After graduating high school, Reem studied business at the American University of Beirut, where she was discovered at a party by a fashion editor who was captivated by Reem’s dress - an ornate gown of silk organza and museum quality embroidery that was made from her mother’s dining room tablecloth. The woman instantly offered to host a fashion show of Reem’s designs which took place ten days following the chance encounter, and weeks later Reem was off to study in New York at the Fashion Institute of Technology and later its Paris counterpart at Esmond.

Following her studies, Reem traveled the world, drawing inspiration from the diverse countries she visited. After working as an interior designer for a few years, Reem continued to develop her craft in Hong Kong and New York where she returned to her fashion roots. In less than 10 years her atelier gained international recognition, sparked by a high society friend wearing Reem’s first bridal design, a simple yet embellished creation, to her society wedding. Soon after, Reem launched her first collection, Reem Acra Bridal, which elevated classic bridal designs through the use of the finest silks and intricate beading and embroidery

Can I just say how much I LOVE Michelle Obama’s look?

And not only do I LOVE her look, but I LOVE Michelle Obama.

Here’s a woman whom no one could possibly accuse of being ditzy, and yet - AND YET - she dresses with purpose, version 2.0

People back in the day dressed with purpose - even if the only witness to their grooming ritual was the breakfast table. That’s what we call “overkill”.

Your day should not be about getting dressed in the morning, just like it shouldn’t be about squeezing in the latest episode of The Bachelor (ahem - can you believe Meagan is still on there???).

Still, if you live the sort of life where you don’t have to sneak off to one of those tunnels Israel hasn’t managed to blow up, climb over a couple of fences, stand in line for 4 and half hours at a checkpoint and dance a little jig to the tune of a few AK-47s firing over your head, all just to get some breakfast**, then you can - and should - enjoy some of the wonderful mindless fun and great beauty this word has to offer.

Unfortunately, frivolity has gotten a bad rap these days because we’ve sort of been OD’ing on it since sometime around 1983.

Which brings me back to how much I LOVE Michelle Obama. She’s beautiful, but not perfect. Baby has in fact, got back. Lots of back, and not too much on top. She does not make use of ridiculous extensions, braids, or any accouterments black women resort to to feel pretty in a world dominated by a very narrowly-defined beauty ideal. She is on the other hand athletic and healthy-looking, even after two kids, proving that yes, post-childbirth weight management is possible.

And she allows herself to be wholly feminine, wholly original, and wholly herself. Like the yellow-gold brocade dress or not, you’ve got to admit she didn’t look the part of a forgettable second fiddle to her man, the president. She looked like a woman, a strong woman, and an individual.

And she paired a little-known designer’s outfit, with cool shoes and J. Crew gloves (J. Crew people!). Her outfit says “I care, yet I am not a snob”. And though it’s obvious she cares, you could never accuse a woman like that (yo, yo, Harvard law, yo) of being frivolous, or an empty-headed clotheshorse.

Now, how much cooler does Michelle look in her green gloves than Cindy McCain ever did in those $250,000 diamond earrings and über-designer cocktail dresses?

Let’s be clear - I am not judging Cindy on her appearance (I happen to have loved many of Sarah Palin’s outfits even though I don’t have an iota of respect for her, and for the record, Cindy’s clothes were beautifully tailored). I’m just saying that Cindy - like her husband - is a bit an antique. A relic from an age when rich people were rich people, and poor people were poor people, and the two classes didn’t mix, and everyone knew their place. Cindy could prance about in $250,000 earrings and an Oscar de la Renta frock when the world economy was collapsing because she’s from a class of people who don’t have to worry about these things. We will always have rich people, but what the we should not have is a nobility class that is so assured of the permannacy of its status that it feels it can do, say, or spend whatever it wants and still be on top.

 Cindy did not feel the need to edit her look to her audience or her husband’s message. She forgot that clothing does in fact send a message. That’s why we don’t show up to interviews in shorts and flip-flops. The flip-flops are not indicators of our professional talents or of who we are on the inside - they are indicators of our self-awareness, our ability to communicate and interact effectively with each other. And Michelle Obama said volumes with her inaugural outfit - and did it thoughtfully, deliberately, and with loads of style.

It’s about time this generation had its own Jackie O.

**In case you thought I was exaggerating…

Every time I switch the channel to CNN, MSNBC, PBS or BBC America, on every political blog I read, and with every right click of my mouse to yet another news link, I am reminded of just haw many days, hours, minutes and seconds are left before Barack “Blessing” (for that’s what “Barack” means) Obama takes over from the Biggest Loser in the modern history of the Oval Office.

A part of me wants to remind the American people that their country - and most of the world along with it - is still falling apart, despite the fact that they may be tired of hearing it and anxious for the kind of let’s-pretend-nothing-is-happening kind of news and entertainment they’ve been fed for decades.

Yet another part of me is a little bit (okay,very) annoyed with this extreme anticipation for Bush to end his reign of terror, incompetence, and theft and for the reasonable, eloquent, empathetic professor to take over, as if the American people could do nothing but hold their collective breath and wait.

But does the responsibility of every American to clean up the mess they were complicit in creating when they elected Bush - twice - end with having (finally - and only just) elected the better person for the job, as opposed to the guy they’d most like to have a beer with?

If all the people of the United States do is hold their breath and count down those final hours, minutes and seconds then they can hardly consider themselves worthy of the promise that is Barack Obama at this moment in history.

It may seem hard to decide when to stand up and fight, and when to turn the other cheek, but that’s only because we the public have had every one of our senses shocked and assaulted into submission, using every dirty trick in the book for so long, that we were reduced to playground politics as opposed to the kind of politics that are mulled over, debated in much of the rest of the world. Where others take up arms, we pick up the remote control. Where others have died, we fretted over which color of iPod to buy, whether a $900 pair of shoes was worth the splurge, and just how big of a car we could afford to drive.

Wouldn’t be nicer, more civilized, more American, to let Bush go quietly into the night without having to face his role in the holocaust-in-the-making that is Iraq? The reintroduction of the torture debate in co-called polite society? The fleecing of the national treasury? The dumbing down of American kids so they will be less able to participate in an economy that’s gone completely global? The depletion and desecration of every natural resource you can think of? The embarrassment on the world stage of epic proportions otherwise known as Katrina?

No. No,no, no, no, and, hmm, let me think…. NO.

When Bush was elected a second time, most of the world washed its hands of an America that had squandered a second chance at getting things on the right track again after a monumental blunder. To quote the Great Illiterate himself, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, er, ah… you can’t fool me twice.

As the institutions and ideas of social, economic and racial justice the boomers, gen-Xers and millennials inherited from the Greatest Generation all lie in ruins, can all the political activism we can muster be boiled down to one simple, finite act, that of casting a vote for the obviously more qualified guy? Do we get to pat ourselves on the back for electing a black dude when no one in the world thought we’d finally get over ourselves and our complexes, and join the twenty-first century?

Is that the best we in 2009 can do?

From the despair of the thirties emerged welfare, a minimum wage, and the beginning of a kind of consciousness that moved us from the era of every-man-for-himself to that of we’re-all-in-it-together.

From the ashes of World War II arose the United Nations and the understanding that our continued existence on this planet depends on mutually assured safety, not mutually assured destruction.

From the struggles of uncommonly brave women, today’s girls can opt to be Superwomen, traditional women, meek women, strong women, women who take on the world in stilettos and pink lipstick, or women who raise the next generation in sweatpants and scrunchies, all the while having achieved something men never have in millions of years of world domination: transcending the confines of gender.

From the grief of a nation reeling from the assassination of a great black leader, after much pain and patience, was born he next leader of the world’s only superpower, the child of two penniless dreamers, one white and one black.

And now, we stand at this moment in history, and dare to call it of our making.

If we let Bush and his gaggle of elitists in small town folks’ clothing, his masters of double-speak and his robber barons get away the greatest heist in American history, then we have effectively spat upon every single achievement of our predecessors, and are in no way worthy of any part of the promise that a president like Barack Obama just might fulfill.

When Obama addresses the nation as its president for the first time, he will likely allude to the long, hard road ahead. That journey along that road begins with George W. Bush’s moment of reckoning.

I always feel a tiny bit self-indulgent when I get on about politics when really, this blog is about writing, but then I think: the best books are the ones where you can just feel the author’s passion flowing from her brain, through her fingers, the keyboard, and finally, reaching right into your own heart.

Passion is the raw material from which you can hope to mold a novel you can feel proud of, one that some people (and this is key… if you’ve managed to please everyone, it;s because you stayed in that vanilla-like place in the middle) will feel passionate about in return. I read a new review of Fashionable Late today where the reviewer alludes to my very obvious love for Cuba. That line tells me that whatever the flaws of the book, that primary fire that got me to dive into that book came across.

In the spirit of passionate blogging, I’m going to post the letter I wrote in response to an infuratiang press release I recieved from a representative of theLiberals, Canada’s current opposition party, in relation to the mess in Gaza.

It’s one of those statements that, in its efforts to remain perfectly dispassionate, ends up saying nothing at all. I would seriously rather hear someone say that Palestinians should be wiped off the face of the planet rather than the meaningless drivel that landed in my inbox today.

Here’s the PR statement, followed by my response.

I know, I know, no one will read it, no one cares to read it, and I just totaly wasted half an hour of my life that might have been better spent on a treadmill working off the post-holiday pooch, but if there’s a bat’s chance out of hell that it does get read - even if it gets tossed - then it was the least I could do.

Dear Concerned Citizen,

Thank you for your letter concerning the conflict in Gaza. Your humanitarian concerns are shared by all Canadians.

We join in the calls for a genuine and deeply shared ceasefire. This means an end to the Hamas rocket attacks on Israeli civilians as well as an end to the air and land attack in Gaza by the Israeli Defence Forces and an immediate response to the humanitarian crisis in the region. The position of the Liberal Party reflects long standing commitments of our party and country to peace, stability, justice and human rights the Middle East

I attach below the official statement of our Party`s leader, one that reflects the spirit and position of the Liberal Party of Canada.

As always, thank you for your concerns.
Sincerely,
Hon Bob Rae
MP Toronto Centre

“I am greatly concerned by the deepening violence in Israel and the Gaza Strip and the fear and suffering on all sides that this mounting instability has caused.

The Liberal Party of Canada unequivocally condemns the rocket attacks launched by Hamas against Israeli civilians and calls for an immediate end to these attacks. We affirm Israel’s right to defend itself against such attacks, and also its right to exist in peace and security.

We regret the loss of life sustained on all sides of the conflict. We call on all parties to end these hostilities, mindful that a durable ceasefire will be necessary to prevent continued civilian casualties and lasting damage to essential civilian infrastructure.

The international community has a responsibility to ensure that the cost of conflict is not borne by the innocent and Canada must stand ready to assist and ensure that basic humanitarian assistance reaches those who need it.

Our thoughts are with those in Israel and the Gaza Strip whose lives are imperiled by the cycle of violence in the region. In the midst of this crisis, we continue to stand for a peaceful resolution. We firmly believe that the basis of this peace will be the mutual recognition by both Israelis and Palestinians of two states, living side by side in peace and security, with a full resolution of the issue of refugees and settlements, as well as secure and internationally recognized borders and boundaries.”

Enlightening, isn’t it?

This was my response:

Dear Mr. Rae,

I am 30 years old, and I am quite sure that you sir, are close to twice my age.

I raise this point because I would like to remind you that when you were my age, you had inherited a world where the rights of aggrieved non-white, non-male populations had finally been brought to the forefront of public discourse and addressed with some justice. It was a world populated with an informed, politicized citizenry, that held its leaders’ feet to the fire when those leaders did not heed the will of those people who elected them, whether those people were female, male, African, European, Latin American, or Asian.

Now that you have reflected on the world which you inherited, please take a moment to reflect on the world that you will bequeath to me.

It is a world where we are asked to weigh the loss of nearly 800 over 1,000 civilians in an illegal, internationally condemned assault, as equal to the loss of 2013 people .

If every life is precious, then the Palestinians of Gaza have suffered with 780  987 more lives in the past twelve days than the citizens of Israel’s border towns. In the past 18 months, Gazans have also had to suffer the slow torture of having their inflow of food and medicine drastically reduced, as well as their access to emergency care and basic electricity, where the children of Israel went to bed every night with their stomachs full and their homes heated. For some reason, you have not weighed this bit of suffering in your equation.

This is very similar to the path Iraqi civilians were on before the ill-fated US invasion - a decade-long, punishing embargo which left an estimated 500,000 dead children in its wake, followed by a crushing military assault.

Our neighbor to the south has now elected a president who ran on a platform to end the bloodletting in Iraq - of both Iraqi civilians and American soldiers.

US polls have also indicated that while the US congress bleats sheepishly those same tired lines you have just delivered in your letter, the American population is beginning to see Israel’s aggression for what it is - a lop-sided assault on citizens where nearly 40 Palestinians must die to avenge one Israeli death. In your government’s efforts to show yourself as impartial and fair, you have shown only, to quote Mr. Zbigniew Brzezinski in a now infamous interview, that you have but the most stunningly superficial understanding of the situation. Please do not assume that your constituency shares the same superficial level of understanding, nor that they will tolerate wilful ignorance from their elected officials. The tide is slowly turning, and fair-minded people would like it to turn fast enough to spare whatever lives can be spared when this carnage finally meets its inevitable end.

Sir, a man of your age and station, and moreover, a person who had once inherited a slightly more just, more thoughtful world, should have the decency to leave such a world behind for me.

If you want to read a proper article by someone who actually has something substantial to say and not some Sarah Palin-esque, cotton candy word concoction that means absolutely nothing, here’s one of the most popular articles in this weekend’s London Independent, which is one of the most well-read and respected newspapers in the world.

I thought the current Israeli rationale for the heavy bombing of one of the world’s most densely populated areas (6,000 inhabitants per square kilometer) is that it uses “smart” weapons. The same “smart” weapons the US used when it invaded Iraq.

“Smart” weapons (as opposed to stupid ones, I guess) are supposed to only go after the bad guys. If you used stupid weapons, (ie shot at a crowd in an indiscriminate fashion) you could be guilty of committing war crimes.

So how does a “smart” weapon hit the UN headquarters, incinerating one of the very few (if not only) food sources Gazans have at the moment?

You’d think if you’d already hit a UN truck delivering relief supplies to the area during a so-called 3 hour ceasefire period and killed the UN worker driving the truck, you’d be a little more careful the next time your “smart” bombs targeted something with massive UN flags and signs posted all over it.

Like the UN headquarters.

Especially, when, um, the actual head of the United Nations happens to be visiting that particular UN office.

Unless of course your weapons weren’t so smart after all.

Or if you didn’t care one way or the other.

Latest stats, courtesy of my new favorite newspaper, The Independent:

19 Number of days that the conflict has been going on.

2,360 Number of Israeli airstrikes so far.

1,013 Number of Palestinianskilled so far.

670 Number of casualties whoare civilians.

225 Number of childcasualties.

69 Number ofwomen casualties.

4,700 Number of Palestinians wounded.

10 Number of Israelisoldiers killed.

4 Number of Israelis killed by friendly fire.

3 Number of Israeli civilians hit by rockets fired from Gaza.

Not only do I love the title of Brenda Janowitz’s latest, but her twist (so to speak) on the usual wedding planning stress is irresistable. Here’s the blurb:

Planning a wedding can be a trying experience…

A little prewedding anxiety is normal for every bride, and Manhattan attorney Brooke Miller isn’t worried. She’s got the loving support of the world’s greatest guy, so planning her nuptials should be a piece of cake.

But that was yesterday.

Today, Brooke’s landed her first big case and has just discovered that the opposing attorney is none other than her fiancé, Jack. But that’s okay. These two professionals aren’t going to let a little courtroom sparring get their legal briefs in a bunch.… Right? Wrong! Now Jack’s pulling every dirty trick in the law books, and Brooke’s starting to suspect that maybe he isn’t the man she thought he was. Warring with her fiancé at work and at home, Brooke realizes that she’ll have to choose between the case of her life, or actually having a life.

And now for the author, in her own words:

Q: Readers of this blog know I am very seriously into traveling - what’s your idea of the perfect travel destination and why?

A. Since I honeymooned in Hawaii this past summer, I’d have to say Hawaii. It’s such a beautiful and quiet place. There’s a rich history there, which is so much fun to explore.

And, of course, there’s just something for me about the beach—feeling the sand under my toes, listening to the crashing waves—that relaxes me to the core and allows my creative juices to flow. What could be more inspiring than a place like Hawaii?! (Does this mean that I get to go there again now?)

Q. Which scene (or scenes) in your novel did you love writing? Why?

A. The most fun I had was writing the scene when Brooke’s family met her fiancé’s family for the first time. There was just so much room to be funny, crazy and completely out there. Those situations are always so stressful, so it was fun to infuse that scene with lots of humor and heart.

Q. Actor/celeb you fantasize the most about while writing your male characters?

A. For Brooke’s fiancé, Jack, I could see a lot of my Hollywood crushes playing the part: Adam Sandler, Jack Black, or Paul Rudd would be perfect. (Yes, I like me a funny guy.)

Q. Where do you write?

I write on my laptop which means that I can pretty much write wherever I please! I love to write on my couch at home, or, if I’m too distracted, at a nearby coffee shop. A fun thing for me is to meet my writer friends and have coffee or breakfast and then put our laptops on the table and write the rest of the day away!

Thanks Brenda!

A great contributor to the failure of Middle Eastern economies (also the number one reason I could not or would not go back to live in Lebanon, far far ahead of the potential threat of another war) is pervasive nepotism.

All Arab kids, even those who live in the more “fashionable” Arab states (like Jordan, with its beautiful, well-dressed, and West-friendly queen, Rania) or ones that are so closely aligned with the United States you’d need a colonoscopy to extract them from the superpower’s bowels (like, say, Saudi Arabia) know that the only way to get a decent job is through a “wasta” (ie: a connection).

On a personal note, it’s because of a “wasta” that I speak English so “beautifully” (to quote someone who was surprised that a Lebanese-born foreigner managed to get published in English). From kindergarten through the fourth grade, I attended school in Saudi Arabia. If you were a child of Arab origin (as I was) then you were required to go to school in Arabic. No ifs, ands or buts about it (well… with one if: IF you also happened to be Muslim. If you were a Christian Arab, you could give up school altogether and run around in the streets with your underwear over your head for all any Saudi official cared). My “wasta” came through my late grandfather, an executive with Tunisian Airlines back when being an executive was on par with lording over a small fiefdom. So with a lot of begging, my parents and grandfather managed to enroll me in English school, which paved the way for future adaptation (and ultimately success) in North America.

Language is an indirect way to control access to the good jobs. Can’t speak English? Good luck. But direct control of who gets the jobs is an even easier way to ensure the rich stay rich and the poor don’t stand a chance.

What’s that? You want to get in the police academy? Really? What does your dad do? A JANITOR???? Ha!

Arabic countries have managed to include women in the workforce and yet they still haven’t managed to extend equal opportunity employment rights to the lower classes (even when they are educated). Which only ensures that Arab countries remain dominated by the hapless, incompetent schleps who’ve ran them for generations and have nothing to show for themselves.

At least it was refreshing to find out that we’re not the only ones… here’s an interesting article on the state of nepotism in, of all places, the United Kingdom.

Imagine waking up one morning, after what seems like an interminable dry spell, and find out you’re pregnant. That’s the high concept behind Melissa Clark’s clever Swimming Upstream, Slowly. Here’s the author, in her own words…

(cute cover, no?)

Q. Tell us about your latest release and the inspiration behind it.

A. “Swimming Upstream, Slowly” is a novel about Sasha Salter, who wakes up one day to find she is pregnant. Only problem is she hasn’t had sex in over 2 years. The doctor’s diagnosis is that Sasha’s body has been harboring a ‘lazy sperm’. Sasha must now open up the Pandora’s box of her past loves to figure out which of her exes is the father - and what the future holds in store.

The idea was born because I was having lunch with a friend and overate. I lifted my shirt to expose my bloated belly and the friend said, half joking, “Are you sure you’re not pregnant?” and I said, “Yeah, right, from a lazy sperm.” I went home that night and started outlining the idea for a movie. I decided, eventually, to write it as a novel instead.

Q. If you were in charge of casting the movie adaptation of your book, who gets the call?

A. Natalie Portman gets the first call. I think she could bring depth and humor to the character. If she’s busy making another movie or doing something wonderfully humanitarian we give Jennifer Gardner a jingle. She’s likable, vulnerable. If she’s having a baby then we try Drew Barrymore because she has nailed these roles in the past. There are lots of male parts in this movie, too. I’d love to see Emile Hirsch do a romantic comedy.

Q. Could you please tell us a little about your writing background?

A. My dad is a writer, so I was always playing on his typewriter and writing on legal steno pads. I wrote short stories from the time that I could write. I studied writing and literature in both college and graduate school. In my 20’s to mid-30’s I worked as a writer in television. I created a kid’s show called “Braceface” which ran for 5 seasons. I loved that experience, but really wanted to write a novel, so I quit my own show and set out to write “Swimming Upstream, Slowly.” It was the best risk I’ve ever taken!

Q. Is writing your main job?

A. I still consider writing my main job even though I’m now teaching at the college level. In between grading, preparing lectures, meeting with students, etc. I somehow manage to find time to write. When I wrote “Swimming…” it was my only job. I had the luxury of time and money from the TV show. Now, my writing time is more precious because it is limited.

Q. What comes most naturally for you to write, dialogue? plot? character? And what’s hardest?

A. I love writing dialogue. I’ve written a few plays in the past and found it incredibly satisfying. I learn so much about my characters through what they say. I often have the feeling that they speak through me and I’m just listening and transcribing their words. I know a lot of writers feel this way. It’s hard for me to slow down and be descriptive - really describe a setting or something. I am very aware of this and tried to do it more consciously in the new book.

Q. What is one of the nicest compliments that you have ever received about your book(s)?

A. “I read it in one sitting.” Since it took a year and three months to write, I am amazed and flattered when someone tells me they zipped through it.

Thanks Melissa!

Melissa Clark is the creator and executive producer of the award-winning television series, ‘Braceface’, and has written for shows on the Disney Channel, Cartoon Network and Fox. She received a master’s degree from the writing program at U.C. Davis, and currently lives in Los Angeles. This is her first novel