enough about me

Okay, I lied. It’s really still about me.

A little over a week ago, YTSL lobbed a request over that I should participate in this meme activity by which I list 7 little known things (or random facts or habits, if I trace it back further.) about myself.¹ I like things. I like lists. And apparently I like to write stuff about myself

7 things about me that I didn’t list in that other post with 6 things about me

  1. I used to be able to get into the yoga “lotus” position without using my hands. Oh, wait. I guess I still can. It hurts a bit more than I remember, though…
  2. I once had a collection of dimes. I was maybe 8 years old. They were just dimes. I found them aesthetically pleasing. Their size, their shape, the feel of them. I brought my collection to “show and tell” once, and the teacher asked what was special about the dimes. I was a bit perplexed by the question.
  3. I often have dreams that I can fly.
  4. I have a bit of a fear of moths. They give me the eebie jeebies.
  5. I like heights. I get kind of a rush from being up high. Kind of an anti-vertigo. (Funny. There was a Mel Brooks movie made in the 70s called High Anxiety that was a parody of Hitchcock’s Vertigo. At least one scene was filmed the Hyatt Regency Hotel in San Francisco, which had glass elevators that went up quite high. I loved that building, and those elevators.)
  6. I don’t watch TV. For someone who has written 26 posts to date with the tag “TV,” this seems odd. I watched a lot as a kid, but have little idea what’s even on these days. I watch things on TV, but only DVDs. Mostly movies. Some old TV series. The only current shows I’ve watched in the last couple of years have been available as iTunes downloads.
  7. I am fidgety. I have trouble sitting still. You’ll often find me twiddling a pen, shredding a paper napkin, twisting a straw…or doodling. I’ve got some crazy-ass elaborate doodles. Doodles, dood.

This is one of those things where I’m supposed to tag others. I’ve considered tagging people I don’t know at all, like, say, Kevin Smith or someone else who’s used the tag pants. Or a blog I hit by using the “next blog” function on WordPress, that gives you random blog after random blog. (And hey, if any of you, Kevin, pants person, or even more randomly selected person would like to play along, please consider yourselves tagged!) Or I can play by the self-selection, tag-free rules, as exemplified by the extraordinary KC. Anyhow, if you are reading this, consider yourself tagged. Like a polar bear or sea turtle that scientists are tracking. (Don’t worry. The tranquilizer will wear off soon.)


¹ I also owe another meme to her. Plus I got tagged by NotSoSage for a different meme the same day. Woohoo. Meme me, baby. (I’ll get to that one at some point, too, Sage.)

² As we all know, writing about oneself is the prime motivation for 98.725% of bloggers.³

³ I made up that statistic. But anyone want to prove me wrong?⁴

⁴ Huh? Huh?

14 thoughts on “enough about me

  1. Wow, you’ve taken footnoting to new heights! Footnotes footnoting yet more footnotes! How many variations of footnoting style can we come up with?

    I’d suggest Dadaist footnotes, numbers that don’t lead anywhere, one footnote referring to multiple citations, choosing numbers non-sequentially – why start at ¹?

    This could be an exciting time to be alive.

  2. All right, you tagged me and I did it. Because I clearly don’t fall into the 1.275% of bloggers without a narcissistic streak, and being randomly selected is almost like winning an award, right?

    -next blogger on WordPress

  3. Jangari:

    I think it was a Robert Anton Wilson book that I read in which there was an alternate storyline going on in the footnotes. It told the story of a debate between various scholars on the significance of the events described in the main text. About midway through the book, though, the footnotes and the main text crossed over, with one of the scholars entering the plot in order to resolve some contentious issue.

    I don’t remember that it was a particularly *good* book, but the footnotes were hilarious.

  4. Jwbates, that sounds very cool. If you were a novelist though, you’d have to get pretty depressed if the best thing about your books was the footnoting!

  5. Jangari-
    Hmm. Footnotes to new heights? Shouldn’t those go at the top of the page? And you do realize, don’t you, that it was you who got me started with the footnoting blog posts. You are the only person I know who puts footnotes in your comments.¹

    Woohoo! I feel like I win a prize by picking someone who was willing to play along! (I must confess that you were not the first “next blog” I went to. But you were the first I landed on that was 1) in English and 2) not an industry-type blog. You may have been around #5. Or perhaps it was #12…)

    That sounds like fun. Too bad it wasn’t particularly a good book, though. There’s another book I have that’s very footnote-oriented. Actually, it seems to be just the footnotes: Mark Dunn’s Ibid.²²


    ¹ Such as this one.

    ²² I haven’t read the whole thing. I think may be Erica did?

  6. I don’t remember it as a *bad* book, either. I just don’t remember it much at all.

    The footnote storyline was a pretty realistic depiction of scholarly debate: minor debates over the interpretation of a word in a text escalating into a fracas over the correct attribution of a quote culminating in a series of duels, gunfights, kidnappings, and bombings. I think I’ve seen that happen several times over the course of Alejna’s career, right? How many people have you had to stab over authorship issues?

  7. jwbates-
    Now, now. “Stab” is such an ugly word. I prefer “skewered.” (And no, really no authorship disputes issues. Though I think those two times when I co-edited volumes, there may have been some resentment towards me that I came first alphabetically.)

  8. Hi! Pants person here!

    Funny… I put that tag on a whim, trying to be funny, (although the whole post is about pants so it’s warrented) and I get tagged! What fun!

  9. Hello Stephanie, Pants person!
    The lesson here is that it’s almost never wrong to go with pants. Because what could be funnier than pants?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s