My Blog

Here’s a poem by Karen Kunawicz that would give one’s lachrymal glands some exercise.  This is for all those whose hearts have been broken and are still struggling to pick up the pieces.

What is the sound of a heart breaking?

It is the sound of someone curled up in a tiny ball crying softly in the night,

the sound of the first unwanted teardrop touching your skin,

it’s the sound of a telephone that doesn’t ring,

the sound of regret pounding inside your brain with every heartbeat,

it’s the whispers of toy animals he gave you.

It’s the shuffling of feet walking away from you,

the sound of your soul shattering into a million pieces

at recognizing the word “goodbye,”

it’s the soundtrack of memories torturing you,

it’s the sound of feeble hands trying to push back the obstinate hands of time,

it’s the sound of cherub’s dying breath,

the sound of all those years disappearing in the vortex of Cupid’s kitchen sink,

it’s the unrelenting plaintive baby meows of an abandoned kitten

outside an ignoring door.

It’s the sound of the rain that doesn’t ever stop,

the sound of all the doors shutting and closing in your face at the same time,

of raging, howling storms in the night when there’s no one there to hold you,

the sound of your voice as it screams back at you,

the echo of “I love yous” burning holes in you,

the sound your heart makes as it tells you to lie still because nothing

you will ever do will matter without love.

The sound of the waves of the polluted beach you went to as it moves from the shore and crashes inside your mind,

of the sniffles that make up your pathetic “SOS to the world,”

the cracking of the brittle black red petals from the sidewalk vendor roses he gave,

the sound of the music he used to make going to your gut.

The sound of things in your room being thrown around and landing on the floor,

the caress of kitchen knives on skin,

the sound your throat makes as you swallow your saltiest tear.

It’s the sound of your own voice calling out to someone who isn’t there,

of dying birds getting splattered on a city pavement,

of terms of endearment used a hundred times a day struggling to crawl into a vacuum of forgetfulness,

it’s the sound of your own sobs keeping you company,

it’s the cold, uncaring stillness of the air you share your space with.

Destruction isn’t always as noisy as bombs exploding.

Sometimes the ultimate catastrophes are as quiet as a feather falling on the floor of a Zen monastery.  No one else can really hear your heart breaking except you.

Yesterday  my good friend Mark greeted me a happy birthday, which amused me because his greeting came a month early.  His greeting jolted me a bit too because it forced me to confront what I had deliberately put off thinking: turning 30.  Turning a year older had never alarmed me until now.  Probably, this fear stems from the feeling that I haven’t quite done enough after being alive for three decades.  What exactly have I done with my life?

• I overcame the demons of my childhood and adolescence.  Growing up, I was painfully shy and excruciatingly insecure.  It could have been very easy for me to self-destruct, but my faith steered me to a different direction.
• I made very good friends who make learning how to be fiercely loyal effortless.
• I have loved unconditionally, and although I’ve been hurt, let down, and ignored, I learned that all these come with the package of loving.
• I graduated magna cum laude from a reputable university.  Graduating with high honors had never been one of my plans, but when I learned that I was to receive the medal, I felt vindicated because there had been a number of people who thought I was not as smart as my two brilliant siblings.
• At 28, I finished my MA in English.
• In 2007, I got a Fulbright Foreign Language Teaching Assistantship at Skyline Community College, San Bruno, California.
• I’ve visited the places I vowed to see.  Now I am making a new list of places to visit.

Maria, an impressionable teenager, picks up a fashion magazine and sees an immaculate image of a model with perfectly coiffed hair, impeccable make-up, and dazzling smile.The model’s body—her ample chest, narrow waist, and unbelievably long legs—reminds Maria of a doll she used to play with when she was younger.The more she stares at the cover, the more she desires to be like her.Forgetting that she is 5’1 and has a big frame, Maria exercises and diets like a maniac; she needs to have the look because ingrained in her subconscious is the image of the model as her standard of beauty.Unknown to her, the image that she admires has been digitally enhanced—the model’s body “doctored” to perfection.

Digital manipulation is one of the many effects of the advancement of technology.Its history dates back to the 19^th century when photography was considered ‘a combination of artistic, technical, theatrical, and entrepreneurial achievement’ (qtd. in Webber 89).During this time, photographic alteration was limited to accommodate requests from the middle class to make minor retouches on their portraiture, like removing unflattering wrinkles or pock marks.However, today digital manipulation has become a norm in many magazines, and the extent to which magazines use the technique goes beyond minor retouches.Because digital manipulation raises a number of ethical concerns, magazines should cease its practice.

The staff of magazines should know that digital manipulation is a form of deceit, and as such can be considered a serious disservice a magazine can give its readers.Being a form of media, magazines are considered sources of credible information.However, if magazines continue to use digitally altered photos, their reputation for fairness and objectivity is compromised.Take, for example, the photo of O.J. Simpson that appeared in Time magazine during his trial.Time ran a photograph of his police mug shot but altered it to make him look darker and more menacing.This edition of the magazine drew a great deal of criticism because as Jane Tallim,a media awareness education specialist, notes, “Not only were there concerns regarding Simpson’s right to a fair trial, but these images also fed public debate about racial stereotyping.”To defend its editorial position, the Time magazine’s editor wrote, “The harshness of the mug shot - the merciless bright light, the stubble on Simpson’s face, the cold specificity of the picture - had been subtly smoothed and shaped into an icon of tragedy” (qtd. in Long).The magazine’s defense seems to suggest that photo alteration is justifiable if it reinforces the drama of a story.However, this guideline seems to be slippery because it makes truth so relative, blurring the divide between what is real and an unacceptable embellishment of truth.Manipulating a picture to shape an editorial statement risks a magazine’s credibility.

With technology, the deception seems to be escalating too.In the September 1994 issue of Mirabella, the fashion magazine had a cover photo with a caption, “Who is the face of America?”It was discovered that the photo is not one model, but “a composite picture that was created by combining six pictures of six different women” (Tallim).While the idea is clever technologically, its representation of what is real is questionable.

Not only is digital manipulation deceiving, it is also disrespectful to people whose images it changes, as in the cases of cover models in fashion and lifestyle magazines.Famous celebrities Nelly Furtado and Kate Winslet have complained after their body images have been butchered to meet the magazines’ requirements.Nelly Furtado’s image on FHM magazine was altered because the editor’s thought that she needed to have a flatter stomach.Furtado lamented how easily a cover of a magazine can take away an image one has built over the years (Tallim).Another example is Kate Winslet’s case, which is ironic because in the GQ magazine’s article she complains about people’s obsession with thinness, and yet her photo in the magazine was altered to make her look thinner and her legs longer. Actress Jamie Lee Curtis reacted to GQ’s treatment of Winslet’s photos: “So what the editors are saying is, the reason Kate Winslet looks sexier than ever is because she’s slim.…So the crazy thing is the message that you’re only sexier than ever if you’re slim.That’s insane” (qtd. in “Real Beauty”). Media practitioners in magazines claim that these alterations present the artists in a better light and are actually beneficial to them.While the good intention is there, the line of thinking is a big slap across the artists’ faces.Don’t they look good enough?Do they need technology to make them more presentable?And what does this say about the idea of beauty?Tallim raises a valid concern when she said:

Only a small percentage of the population can meet the physical demands of a supermodel.But now apparently, even they can’t reach the necessary standard of perfection.If Kate Winslet can’t meet the standard for a magazine cover, what chance do the rest of us have? … Why is this unattainable attractiveness for boys and girls being pushed to the limit? (qtd. in Cobb)

The biggest ethical concern of digital manipulation is on its effect on ordinary people—those who are not in the limelight.It promotes an unrealistic image that may aggravate people’s body insecurities and cause unhealthy eating habits.Fashion and entertainment magazines have been at the forefront in the promotion of unattainable standards of beauty—dictating the ideal size, skin type and color.For example, in 1990, Michelle Pfeiffer was featured in Esquire magazine in an article entitled, “What Michelle Pfeiffer Needs…Is Absolutely Nothing.”However, in 1995, Adbusters revealed that the magazine was actually billed $1, 525 in photo touch ups for Michelle’s “flawless image” (Tallim).Having no knowledge of this fact, impressionable readers would think that Michelle Pfeiffer had that natural look and would wonder how nature can be so generous to some and cruel to most.

If magazines continue to alter the images of their models, making them look thinner and unnaturally perfect, they send the message to the readers that that is what beautiful should look like.Imagine its effect on people who struggle about their looks and cannot meet these expectations.They will wallow in self-pity, and their self-esteem will be lowered. They may even be likely to develop eating disorders since it has been found that eating disorders can be caused by psychological factors.If people with low self-esteem are bombarded with messages that to be beautiful, one has to be thin–as promoted by most ma

Maria, an impressionable teenager, picks up a fashion magazine and sees an immaculate image of a model with perfectly coiffed hair, impeccable make-up, and dazzling smile.The model’s body—her ample chest, narrow waist, and unbelievably long legs—reminds Maria of a doll she used to play with when she was younger.The more she stares at the cover, the more she desires to be like her.Forgetting that she is 5’1 and has a big frame, Maria exercises and diets like a maniac; she needs to have the look because ingrained in her subconscious is the image of the model as her standard of beauty.Unknown to her, the image that she admires has been digitally enhanced—the model’s body “doctored” to perfection.

Digital manipulation is one of the many effects of the advancement of technology.Its history dates back to the 19^th century when photography was considered ‘a combination of artistic, technical, theatrical, and entrepreneurial achievement’ (qtd. in Webber 89).During this time, photographic alteration was limited to accommodate requests from the middle class to make minor retouches on their portraiture, like removing unflattering wrinkles or pock marks.However, today digital manipulation has become a norm in many magazines, and the extent to which magazines use the technique goes beyond minor retouches.Because digital manipulation raises a number of ethical concerns, magazines should cease its practice.

The staff of magazines should know that digital manipulation is a form of deceit, and as such can be considered a serious disservice a magazine can give its readers.Being a form of media, magazines are considered sources of credible information.However, if magazines continue to use digitally altered photos, their reputation for fairness and objectivity is compromised.Take, for example, the photo of O.J. Simpson that appeared in Time magazine during his trial.Time ran a photograph of his police mug shot but altered it to make him look darker and more menacing.This edition of the magazine drew a great deal of criticism because as Jane Tallim,a media awareness education specialist, notes, “Not only were there concerns regarding Simpson’s right to a fair trial, but these images also fed public debate about racial stereotyping.”To defend its editorial position, the Time magazine’s editor wrote, “The harshness of the mug shot - the merciless bright light, the stubble on Simpson’s face, the cold specificity of the picture - had been subtly smoothed and shaped into an icon of tragedy” (qtd. in Long).The magazine’s defense seems to suggest that photo alteration is justifiable if it reinforces the drama of a story.However, this guideline seems to be slippery because it makes truth so relative, blurring the divide between what is real and an unacceptable embellishment of truth.Manipulating a picture to shape an editorial statement risks a magazine’s credibility.

With technology, the deception seems to be escalating too.In the September 1994 issue of Mirabella, the fashion magazine had a cover photo with a caption, “Who is the face of America?”It was discovered that the photo is not one model, but “a composite picture that was created by combining six pictures of six different women” (Tallim).While the idea is clever technologically, its representation of what is real is questionable.

Not only is digital manipulation deceiving, it is also disrespectful to people whose images it changes, as in the cases of cover models in fashion and lifestyle magazines.Famous celebrities Nelly Furtado and Kate Winslet have complained after their body images have been butchered to meet the magazines’ requirements.Nelly Furtado’s image on FHM magazine was altered because the editor’s thought that she needed to have a flatter stomach.Furtado lamented how easily a cover of a magazine can take away an image one has built over the years (Tallim).Another example is Kate Winslet’s case, which is ironic because in the GQ magazine’s article she complains about people’s obsession with thinness, and yet her photo in the magazine was altered to make her look thinner and her legs longer. Actress Jamie Lee Curtis reacted to GQ’s treatment of Winslet’s photos: “So what the editors are saying is, the reason Kate Winslet looks sexier than ever is because she’s slim.…So the crazy thing is the message that you’re only sexier than ever if you’re slim.That’s insane” (qtd. in “Real Beauty”). Media practitioners in magazines claim that these alterations present the artists in a better light and are actually beneficial to them.While the good intention is there, the line of thinking is a big slap across the artists’ faces.Don’t they look good enough?Do they need technology to make them more presentable?And what does this say about the idea of beauty?Tallim raises a valid concern when she said:

Only a small percentage of the population can meet the physical demands of a supermodel.But now apparently, even they can’t reach the necessary standard of perfection.If Kate Winslet can’t meet the standard for a magazine cover, what chance do the rest of us have? … Why is this unattainable attractiveness for boys and girls being pushed to the limit? (qtd. in Cobb)

The biggest ethical concern of digital manipulation is on its effect on ordinary people—those who are not in the limelight.It promotes an unrealistic image that may aggravate people’s body insecurities and cause unhealthy eating habits.Fashion and entertainment magazines have been at the forefront in the promotion of unattainable standards of beauty—dictating the ideal size, skin type and color.For example, in 1990, Michelle Pfeiffer was featured in Esquire magazine in an article entitled, “What Michelle Pfeiffer Needs…Is Absolutely Nothing.”However, in 1995, Adbusters revealed that the magazine was actually billed $1, 525 in photo touch ups for Michelle’s “flawless image” (Tallim).Having no knowledge of this fact, impressionable readers would think that Michelle Pfeiffer had that natural look and would wonder how nature can be so generous to some and cruel to most.

If magazines continue to alter the images of their models, making them look thinner and unnaturally perfect, they send the message to the readers that that is what beautiful should look like.Imagine its effect on people who struggle about their looks and cannot meet these expectations.They will wallow in self-pity, and their self-esteem will be lowered. They may even be likely to develop eating disorders since it has been found that eating disorders can be caused by psychological factors.If people with low self-esteem are bombarded with messages that to be beautiful, one has to be thin–as promoted by most magazines– they will develop an unhealthy sense of things.They will think that “if fat is bad and thin is good, then thinner is better, and thinnest is best — even if thinnest is sixty-eight pounds in a hospital bed on life support” (“What Causes”).

Digital manipulation is certainly a human achievement in technology.It allows people with the necessary skills and technology to combine a number of images into a seamless whole.It has upgraded photography as an art.It has helped filmmakers in creating impressive special effects.However, it has no place in the business where truth and reality matter.Presenting a manipulated look of what should be real weakens a magazine’s reputation, and as John Long, a former president of the National Press Photographers Association, reminds his colleagues, “Journalists have only one thing to offer the public and that is CREDIBILITY.…Without credibility we have nothing. …Without the trust of the public we cannot exist as a profession.”Aside from this, magazines have a social responsibility to enrich culture and not contribute to society’s decay.What kind of society perpetuates an unreasonable and unattainable standard, making its people suffer?

Magazines, as mirrors of society, should refrain from embellishing the truth and present things as they happen.As a powerful medium, they should not cultivate stereotypes that may be detrimental to the well-being of their public.When magazines stop publishing altered photographs, every image they use will reflect more accurately who and what happens in society.Nobody will be left out, and the danger of misrepresentation will be minimized.

And things will be much different for Maria.She picks up a magazine and sees an immaculate image of a model—tall, thin, and beautiful.She spots another magazine and sees an equally immaculate image of another model—short, stocky, and beautiful.Maria smiles.Now she has more choices.

Twice a month, I visit a little shop in Dumaguete, called Barberia, to have my nails cleaned.  I always look forward to these visits because I get to have an hour and a half to myself and I always enjoy the music and the reading materials the shop provides.  Normally, I just keep to myself, but last week my eyes were transfixed on a chubby little kid that reminded me so much of myself when I was young.

Obviously the kid hadn’t been frequenting the barber shop because his dad was still there cheering him on.  The sight of the father and son brought me back to my childhood.  My father was also always there when I had my haircut.  I vividly remember how prior to each visit to the barber, my father would ease my nerves by bribing me with a burger or spaghetti treat in one of the snack shops in San Carlos.

| was too sure that the same method worked well with the kid, but the next thing I heard almost scandalized me.  The father was chanting, “Wow, ang gwapo-gwapo ni Jun-Jun!”  I had to give the child a second look to validate what the father said, but sad to say, what I saw on the mirror was a solid evidence of what my friend, Lara, said a few months ago: “Not all kids are cute.”

Looking back, I couldn’t recall my dad complimenting me about my good looks.  I don’t know if my dad’s silence about my physical attributes was his way of telling me that physical beauty is not important or was his gentle hint that my physical features didn’t warrant such compliment.  What I know is that my self-confidence wasn’t built because my parents built up the illusion that I was good-looking.  While my dad was stingy with praises about my looks, he was definitely generous with his praises about my abilities.  My dad never failed to remind me and my siblings that we were just as good as anybody else, and to stretch it a little, he would add that we were probably better.  As kids, my brother, sister, and I were quite impressionable, and every time we would gush about somebody’s good abilities to our dad, his standard reply would always be, “Is s/he better than you?”  Hearing that would always leave a big smile on my face because even if I know that the answer to his question may be a resounding “YES”, the fact that somebody strongly believes in me that way  could drive me to do better than what I think is my best.

When the father and son left the shop, I couldn’t help wondering how the child would turn out as a human being.  Would his father’s compliment have an impact on his life?

After sporting long, layered hair for the longest time, I decided to cut–no, shave–my head.  My friends asked me why I did it - something I could not easily answer.  Some of them facetiously suggested that I I did it out of desperation.  Perhaps…

Anyway, the shaving happened last Saturday.  I was just supposed to accompany my mom who wanted to have a mani and a pedi, but when we got to the salon, my mom goaded me to have my hair trimmed.   Sitting on the customer’s chair, I told the stylist I wanted him to shave my head.  He touched my hair and asked if I was sure about it because he honestly thought, it’s “sayang.”  My mom heard our conversation and suggested I try a shorter cut first.  So I asked the stylist just to trim it and emphasize the layers.  He was toying with his fancy scissors when I asked him to just use a razor and start shaving my head.  He seemed so obliging, and after ten minutes, there I was looking at a giant, burnt siopao on the mirror.  My face was so round and big, and just staring at it made me crave for the steamed carbo-rich food.

Am I sorry I cut my hair so short?  Not really.  I had this do a few years ago, and I had this exact look when I had my SSS ID picture taken.  I remember I looked like an ex-convict back then, and I am sure I still have the same menacing look now even if I have packed a few more pounds to my frame.  Despite this, I feel that cutting my hair this short is a very liberating move.  I don’t have to take the pains of shampooing, drying, and treating my hair.

Feeling comfortable and looking good with this shaved head is entirely a different story.  My mom swears it makes me look younger, but my 4-year old niece has a different take on it.  We have this verbal game with her where we ask her if something’s nice.  I don’t know when this game started, but every time any of us in the family has something new, we show the item to her and ask her, “Is this nice?”  For example, when we were eating, my mom said, “Jab, look at my nails.  Are they nice?”  Jabe, my niece, smiled and replied, “Nice.”  I followed the same line of questioning and asked, “Look at my hair, Jab.  Is it nice?”  My niece just looked at me with a pained look on her face.  She opened her mouth then closed it, tried to open it again, and decided to give a very malicious grin.  Ok, Ok I get it!

——————————————————————

I was looking at somebody’s DVD collection hoping to find something good to watch on DVD.  While I was leafing through his DVD album, I found a very intriguing title:  “Beautiful Woman In Big Mouth.”  Upon closer inspection, I got it.  The DVD in question is atually a compilation of Julia Roberts’ movies.

——————————————————————

A couple of years ago, I dined at a local fast food chain whose mascot has a thing with honey.  I wanted to use their rest room, but when I was about to go inside, the door’s note almost made me wet my pants.  The note read:  “Men’s CR is out of order.  Please use the disabled CR.”  Tsk, tsk, tsk…How politically incorrect can you get!  LOL!

——————————————————————-

A parlor in Dumaguete’s public market had this sign.  “Wanted:  Manicurist.  Qualification:  Bayot!”  Oh my, and I thought society is not supposed to discriminate.”

——————————————————————-

I was watching on TV an awarding ceremony of a modern-day hero.  It would have been such an inspiring ceremony, but I ended up laughing so hard.  Maybe I just didn’t hear it right, but i swear the citation of the certificate read: “This award is given to __________________ for having been shot….”  Couldn’t it be said any better?  Shouldn’t they be awarding the man for his bravery?  Just a thought…

For reasons not too clear to me, I’ve been following Iisa Pa Lamang, a local teledrama on ABS-CBN starring Claudine Barretto, Gabby Concepcion, Diether Ocampo among others.  Perhaps, I was curious if Gabby had not lost his acting prowess.  Maybe, I desperately wanted to know if Diether had improved as an actor: A few years ago, I regarded him as an expressionless actor trying incessantly to pass as a thespian.  Or maybe, I was in for the endless catfights between Claudine and Anglica Panganiban or Claudine and Cherry Pie Picache.  Regardless, the show definitely has  me glued to my TV.

At first, I was impressed by the show’s fast pace.  I figured this might be a welcome departure from the Pinoy teledramas’ propensity to take the long route as far as plot movement is concerned.  However, I soon realized that the show is actually worse.  The plot is circular that if it were a ride, the viewers, as its passengers, would be in for a nasty, nauseating spin.  It doesn’t help that the writers give their actors the lamest lines seemingly taken directly from a book of cliches.  Catherine, the heroine, in one scene was asked why she wore jewelry even when she was swimming.  Her answer?  “Well, you know, diamonds are a girl’s best friend.”  A shouting match between Catherine and Scarlett, one of the contravidas, features the following lines which I doubt would enter Pinoy’s most memorable lines ever: “Slut,” “husband stealer,” “desperate housewife from hell,” etc.  If I had been given ten pesos every time I rolled my eyes, I would have had a fat wallet.  I am even surprised that I can still look straight ahead after those record-breaking eye-rolls.

Don’t get me wrong.   The show does have its redeeming values.  The acting, for one, is laudable.  Yes, Gabby still has his charisma; Diether has greatly improved; Claudine gives a commendable performance; however, all of them are out-acted by Cherry Pie Picache whose portayal of a contravida is both amusing and irritating.

In spite of this, the characterization is still flat.  I think the blame goes to the writers, not the actors.  The actors have done everything in their capacity to salvage the show.  Their characters are supposed to be intelligent people, but they are thrown in compromising situations that make them opt for stupid choices.  Consequently, their actions don’t elicit empathy from the viewers–not to me at least.  Most of the time, instead of feeling for the character, I find myself laughing at them.  Which leads me to my question:  Is it really a drama or a comedy?

If the expression, “bite your tongue,” were literal, i would have bled to death or swallowed my tongue a long time ago.  There had been a lot of occasions when I wanted to lash out at someone but chose to smile or feign laughter.  Every time I recall any of these “events” that I controlled my homicidal tendencies, I can’t help feeling proud for being a better person.  However, it also forces me to feel again the sting of what could have been a slap brought by the horrible experience.  One of these experiences happened not a long time ago…

When the HRD office of my University issued a memorandum requiring all faculty and staff to undergo a physical examination at the University hospital, I didn’t waste time making an appointment with my doctor.  True, I was tempted to ignore the memo, but the voice of my mom telling me that I should comply because (1) I am not getting any younger and (2) I am on my way  to becoming morbidly obese seemed to be too strong to ignore.  So like a dutiful employee and child, I scheduled my PE.  I hadn’t been in my doctor’s office long enough when I learned a lesson only hospital employees can effectively impart.

Lesson Number 1:  Truth hurts.  When my doctor’s secretary saw me, she immediately knew what I needed from the office.  She greeted me by saying, “You need a PE, no?”  Good naturedly, I smiled and said yes.  She prepared the forms I needed for my lab, but her efficiency also gave her license to give commentaries.  She started by saying, “You need to have your cholesterol and blood sugar tested because you gained weight.”  At this point, my smile was from ear to ear; I even gave a hearty laugh.  Then she continued, “We also need data about your liver and kidney because you’re big!”  I felt my smile drop a quarter of an inch.  “How about EKG?  Just have the EKG because you’re big.”  At this point,  my smile vanished.  In normal circumstances, I could have easily given a witty retort, but she only stated the fact and the manner she said it was so devoid of malice, so I let it go.  I felt good because I did not “bark”, but having been told I was FAT three times didn’t do much to my ego.

After I got my results, I went back to my doctor’s office.  My BP that day was 130/90, so I asked my doctor if it was normal, and he said it was.  I felt victorious but my high spirit was instantly crushed when he added, “If your BP was 110/80, you would pass out because you’re big!”  There’s that “big” word again–said matter-of-factly.  I heard myself give a nervous laugh (something I do when I am at a loss for words).  Then the consultation proceeded.  I asked him again if the hospital had any pre-diabetic treatment.  I explained that I wanted to start medication because our family has a terrible diabetes history.  The doctor graciously explained something about my glucose tolerance, and he said I needed another test and if I tested negatively, then I wouldn’t need any medication because if I’d take the medicines for it, my calorie intake would be diminished.  I swear the doctor did a double take and said, “Although in your case (me, being big and all), that wouldn’t be a problem.”  Ouch!

The universe has conspired against me, and I get its message:  Lose weight, you fat ass!

I’d like to believe I’m a level-headed person.  Most of the time, I have a great sense of control over things that go inside my head, but I realized that I tend to lose it when everything is happening all at once in my life.  Thankfully, though, my coping mechanism to stress is not as dangerous as other people’s; to say the least, mine is comical.

• Last night, I pulled an all-nighter doing my research paper.  I should have worked on it a long time ago, but the procrastinator in me convinced me I could do it overnight.  It didn’t help too that on the day I decided to start writing–the day before the deadline–Charice Pempengco guested on Oprah, Dancing with the Stars had its semi-finals, and Samantha Who? had its season finale.  Thanks ABC!  By the time I finished my essay, I realized I only had two hours left to get some shut-eye.  A couple of hours after I dozed off, my alarm  clock damaged my eardrums.  I was tempted to sleep through my alarm, but my conscience wouldn’t have any of it.  I got up feeling groggy–not even the cold/hot shower could make me fully awake.  After I dressed, I hurriedly left my room to have enough walk time to the bus stop.  I was half-way to the stop when I found out that what’s in my hand was the TV remote control instead of my cell phone.
• A few years ago, I was so burnt out that I found teaching and going to school stupendously dreadful.  One time, on my way to school, I hailed a cab and when the driver asked me where I was heading, I heard myself say, "BC 25," the course I was teaching.  Confused, the driver asked again, "Where?"  I was about to say, "I mean EL33," another course I was handling.  Thankfully, my mouth said the right address my mind failed to process.
• A couple of weeks later, I boarded another tricycle cab and found myself riding with a chummy driver. On good times, I would have appreciated his friendliness, but at that time, I had so much on my plate that I wanted to zip his mouth.  As we were navigating our way around the narrow streets of Dumaguete, he asked me if we were to turn right.  Instead of confirming it, in my very dignified, teacher-like voice I said, "Very Good!"  The inappropriateness of my response quieted the driver, and we drove in awkward silence for two minutes–the longest two minutes I have ever felt.

Joan
Didion once wrote about how, at a very young age, she was forced to form a
habit which she later on credit as the one thing that got her to professional
writing. In her article, On Keeping a Notebook, she recalled that
as a young kid, she was given a notebook so she could sit still while her
mother was doing other things. Other
children her age at that time would have preferred toys, but the notebook
worked out perfectly for Joan. It is
probably the solitude the activity requires that drove her to opine that
keepers of notebooks are lonely individuals.

How Joan discovered keeping a
notebook is exactly the same way how I got acquainted with journaling. The time I got into writing couldn’t have
come at a more opportune time than in my adolescence when I was painfully shy
and dangerously insecure. Yes, writing
shielded me from the loneliness I felt at that time, but after journaling for
almost half my life, I realized that keeping a notebook isn’t only for lonely
individuals: I’ve long reconciled with those personal issues that made me
miserable, yet I still continue to maintain a journal. For me, journaling is the best writing
activity I have ever done in my life.

First of all, journal writing is
a very personal activity. I do not have
to share it with anybody, so I do not have to concern myself with the mechanics
of writing—grammar, spelling, etc. More
than that, I can write my personal thoughts on some things without running the
risk of being laughed at, or worse, judged. Furthermore, I can write about some things I may not be privy on sharing
with other people, thinking my ideas too trivial or personal.

Second, journal writing allows
me to preserve some precious memories—they may be sad or happy. I always find it rewarding to rummage through
my old notebooks and read entries that bring me back to how things happened in
my life. I totally agree with Annie
Dillard when she wrote that we need to write “to rescue the beauty of
experience form the destructiveness of change.”

Lastly, journal writing serves
some kind of a practice for me. I am a
firm believer that writing is a skill and that the more I write, the more
natural writing will be for me. I know
for a fact that writing is a skill, and so if I want to improve, the best way I
could do it is through constant practice.

There have been many writing
activities that I have found fun and fulfilling, but none of them comes close
to the satisfaction I get from writing one entry in my journal. I guess, the joy of journaling is tops.

• you’re having breakfast and all you can imagine is the food you’re going to devour for lunch or supper
• you blame your washing machine, dryer or what have you for "shrinking" your favorite shirt
• you have an excuse for every food violation your appointed food police points out to you.  Common excuses:  the food is sugar-free, fat-free, etc.
• you grab any food you can at life’s slightest provocation and claim that you’re an "emotional eater"
• your three-year old nephew, with his limited vocabulary and a bit problematic syntax, perfectly enunciates the question, "you’re tambok, right?"