Truly,
I have little else to write about today, except politics, food, and writing. Oh,
and then there was that wonderful rainstorm this afternoon about 5:00 p.m. By
4:30 the sky to the north and east looked blue-gray but not dark enough to
promise rain. Gradually, however, everything darkened, and I began to hear
distant thunder.
When
the storm came, it was a nice, gentle summer one—we had no lightning here,
though nearby areas did, and the thunder was soft and distant enough that
Sophie was not overly alarmed. But the good, healing rain came down heavily
enough to water things but not so heavily as to damage blooming plants. There
was wind, blowing sheets of water across the back yard, and I did fear for the
bougainvillea, which is just beginning to bloom again and which was battered a
bit. But it seems to have survived. I know in North Fort Worth there was more
damage, and I am sorry—but for us, I am grateful for just the right amount of
storm. I’ve said it before, but my mom taught us to love a thunderstorm, and
that stays with me today.
I’m
avidly following the news of the Democratic walkout in Austin today, and I am
most angry at Ryan Rusak’s opinion piece in the Star-Telegram where he
says Democrats just need to win more elections. How can they, the way Abbott is
stacking legislation against them? Although Rusak claims the exodus to D.C is a
gift to Abbott, I don’t see it that way. I think this extreme move will spotlight
the ways in which Abbott is trying to create a fiefdom here in Texas—and will
turn thinking voters against any 2024 presidential hopes he is harboring. Yes,
I think there are enough thinking voters in our country.
As for
the constitutionality of what the Democrats are seeking—whether or not the DOJ
can help them—I am not a constitutional scholar and can’t comment. But I bet
that holds true for a lot of those who are commenting.
Abbott
has, of course, not commented on the overwhelming numbers of Texans who waited
hours in line to testify against his voter suppression bill. But they did, and
I hope they were effective, some not testifying until the wee hours. I haven’t
heard who testified in favor of it, but I can guess—Abbott, Patrick, and
Paxton, the triumvirate of evil in Texas. I’m holding my breath for what
happens next.
And on
to food. We had ribs last night—with a sauce made of apricot preserves and soy.
Awfully good, though there was talk that we should replace baby back ribs with
beef next time. I’m not sure the same sauce would work as well on beef—big difference
in flavors of the meat.
We
must be on an Asian kick, because tonight I fixed an Asian salad—and had a real
learning lesson about rice noodles. Watch for it in my Thursday blog from
Gourmet on a Hot Plate. Now that I know how to do it properly, I’m anxious to
do it again. Maybe I’m hooked on soy.
From a
writerly point of view, it was a good day, a satisfying one. The phrase
work-in-progress is common among writers, though in my case it was really a
misnomer: it should have been something like work-in-limbo. Saying I’d put it
aside to simmer in the back of my mind was an elegant excuse—I’d really ignored
it, because it puzzled me, and I filled my days with other, less ambitious
chores. But today I went back to the rough draft of Irene in Danger, with
new ideas for working out a plot point that had been a stumbling block and
creating a new conflict between characters. I began, of necessity, at the
beginning and am about halfway through re-reading the 27,000 words I had
already written, editing and re-writing as I go. It feels good. Please cross
your fingers for me.
And
that, folks, was my day. How about yours?
No comments:
Post a Comment