for just $1 a day, you can save the yuppies!

Every once in a while, I'm reminded of the fact that there's a whole group of people who run around in a parallel-universe New York that bears very little resemblance to the one I live in.  A few of them were recently profiled here:

Starting Salaries but New York Tastes

This heartbreaking human interest story details the lives of several young New Yorkers who are struggling to make ends meet.  The article profiles the various strategies these youngsters are forced to employ to stretch their inadequate wages: dining on franks and beans, shopping at Salvation Army, and even (gasp!) going brunette to save money at the salon.  The article is accompanied by sad-looking pictures of its subjects holding the franks and beans they're forced to eat and posing in their walk-in-closet sized apartments.

Given the tragic, slightly Upton Sinclair-ish tone of the article, you'd think these kids were working at McDonalds, or at least Americorps.  But wait!  Laura Werkheiser, who stopped dying her hair, is...a publicist.  Noah Driscoll, of franks and beans, is a project manager at a marketing firm.  And the dude who shops at Salvation Army and subsists on street meat is a communications strategist who makes $60,000 a year!

In case anyone is wondering, the median household income in New York in 2006 was $40,000.  That includes couples and families with children, making the actual average income per adult somewhat lower.

If a single person with no children and (in most cases) relatively little debt from school can't survive in New York on a salary in the $40-$60K range, something must be terribly wrong.

Oh, wait.

"Adam Leibsohn [the communications strategist] pays $1,650 a month for his own apartment in the East Village."

"Cassaundra Reed...lives in the West Village with three roommates, and pays $925 for a narrow room where the only viable sleeping arrangement is a twin-sized loft bed."

"Ms. Werkheiser [the poverty brunette]...lives, with two roommates, in a $3,450-a-month three-bedroom apartment on the Lower East Side."

Clearly these young men and women have succumbed to New York real estate insanity, laboring under the delusion that if you don't live in Manhattan below 14th Street, you might as well not exist.  But they are also partially the cause of this insanity.  Rents in these neighborhoods, which are already obscene, will keep going up as long as there are fresh crops of idiots like these who are willing to pay them.

I do wish someone (preferably a working-class single mother) could walk up to these people, smack them on the head and say, "Hey, idiot!  You have it better than more than half of New York, so stop complaining and make a freakin' budget!"  

The problem for these people is not that they are poor.  The problem is that they've obviously never had to think twice about money before now.  If they had, they would realize that paying 50%--or more--of your monthly income in rent is not sustainable.  Or they would realize that if you have to do crazy shit like selling your eggs, you may need to rethink your lifestyle.  But clearly the people in this article live in a different world than me.  Among the items they lament having to forgo: Dior mascara, trips to Peter Luger Steakhouse, mani-pedis, and iPods (hand-me-down CD player!  the shaaaaaame!).  The article also contains a lengthy section on the various strategies these folks employ to get drunk, from sneaking flasks of vodka into expensive bars, to not eating dinner so your watermelon martini will pack more punch, to (horrors!) flirting.

Now, I do realize that in many lines of work, one is expected to be well-dressed and well-groomed.  Socializing is often expected to get ahead in your chosen career.  And if you're young, straight, and single, you may consider a certain level of bar-hopping and personal grooming mandatory.  But apparently no one told these kids that getting soused weekly is NOT mandatory.  Nor is $25 lip gloss or a designer handbag.

You may note, dear reader, that I keep referring to them as kids, although everyone interviewed in the article is approximately the same age as me (between 24 and 27).  I guess people just seem much younger when they clearly have very little idea how to survive as adults.

My first job in New York after graduation had a starting salary of $24,985.  After taxes, that was a take-home pay of about $1,400 a month.  With that, I paid my rent ($467); I paid for 1/3rd of the utilities in the apartment I shared with two roommates, my cell phone, a monthly MetroCard, food (and, I must admit, copious amounts of alcohol), and the minimum payment on my students loans ($82 with a 30-year consolidation repayment term).  I paid $50 a month dues to a political organization I belonged to.  I also paid about $200 a month on three or four credit cards, which was the minimum payment for the $11,000 in credit card debt I was in.  I went out several times a week, although I rarely paid more than $6 for a drink.  And I lived in Manhattan, although the young folks in this article probably don't even know there is a 149th Street.

I'm not trying to glorify anything here.  It was stressful.  Our apartment was a New York horror story, complete with rats and a Biblical flood of raw sewage one Labor Day weekend.  I ate more Wendy's, Taco Bell and Hot Pockets than any person should reasonably eat.  I hated my job.  I worried constantly about money.  And my worries were justified, because $25,000 a year is not a living wage in New York City, not even for a single person.

I guess the point of all that was that now, four years later, when I am earning a salary in the same range as the people in this article, I appreciate it a lot more, and I know how to use it.  I've never paid more than $600 a month in rent.  If a shirt costs more than $20 or a pair of pants costs more than $40, I probably won't buy it, because I really don't think anyone should be paying more than that for a piece of cloth.  I do spend money on things that I like and are important to me--going out with friends, discovering tasty vegan restaurants, theater, classes, and books.  I paid off that $11,000 in credit card debt and was able to save around $18,000 for grad school.

I sure hope that I never lose my poverty-induced price awareness.  It makes me feel miles more prepared to survive in this unforgiving city than the poor schmucks in this article.  And to the $60,000-a-year-earning dude who shops at Salvation Army: cut it out.  There are actual poor people who need that shit.  At least step it up to Beacon's Closet.

Wear Your Keffiyah with Pride Day

After this ridiculousness involving a TV personality, a donut shop, and a scarf that was most definitely not intended to have any political significance, someone on Facebook started a "Wear Your Keffiyah with Pride Day" event. Okay, I'll do that, I thought. I own two keffiyahs, neither of which was purchased at Urban Outfitters, and I haven't had much chance to wear them since my days at Bir Zeit on the Hudson. So this morning I put on my keffiyah and marched over to my local Dunkin Donuts.

Of course, as I approached the Dunkin Donuts, there was an Arab-American woman in a hijab coming out. I wondered what she was thinking. Is it (a) hey, that's cool, a white girl wearing a keffiyah--solidarity!; (b) CULTURAL APPROPRIATION!; or (c) my small child is about to run into the street? Does she know why I am lingering around said donut shop? I considered asking her to take my picture, but as she did have a small child who was about to run into the street, I didn't think she'd be receptive.

My plan was to take a picture of myself wearing my keffiyah in front of the Dunkin Donuts, preferably in front of a huge poster for iced coffee. FOILED! There were NO POSTERS in the storefront windows. None! I considered asking someone to take my picture inside, where there were large posters of iced coffee, but as it was 11am on a weekday, the Dunkin Donuts was completely full of old people, and I was not at all confident in their abilities to work a digital camera. Plus this one old guy in a Navy hat kept staring at me, so I had to go with Plan B.

Note: Miles the cat also participated in Wear Your Keffiyah with Pride Day.

David A. Paterson, you get a hug!

In case you haven't heard, New York Governor David A. Paterson recently declared that gay couples legally married in other states/countries are entitled to the rights of a married couple in New York state, even though they are not technically married while in New York.  That's not exactly gay marriage, but still pretty cool.  What's even better is that Paterson seemingly did this (gasp!) out of his own genuine commitment to equality and despite the complete lack of any coherent gay marriage movement in NY at the moment.  How often do you see a politician do that?

A day or two after Paterson's announcement, the New York Times ran an article describing how Paterson became an advocate of gay rights.

"When David A. Paterson was growing up and his parents would go out of town, he and his little brother would stay in Harlem with family friends they called Uncle Stanley and Uncle Ronald."

ADORABLE!

David Paterson's gay uncles made a big impression on him, it seems.  Turns out he has been fighting for gay rights for most of his career.  He introduced New York's first hate crimes bill into the state senate in the '80s, and refused to support a compromise bill that did not include language about gays and lesbians.  When the hate crimes bill finally passed--in 2000--Paterson reportedly said "Now I can die in peace."  Luckily, he survived a few more years.

"In many respects...we only recognize our own struggles," Paterson said in a news conference announcing the decision.  "I've wanted to be someone in the African-American community who recognizes the new civil rights struggle that is being undertaken by gay and lesbian and transgendered people."

BAM!  Take that, don't-you-compare-gay-rights-and-black-civil-rights people!  This dude is only the second black governor in the history of the US.  And he's blind!  And he's still on our side!

Of course, someone this cool could only become governor by accident.  But all I have to say is, thank you, Eliot Spitzer, for being a giant douche.

holy crap, what have i gotten myself into?

I recently purchased the Not for Toursists Guide to New York City as a gift for someone, and on a whim I thought I'd pick up the LA version for myself. I had procured a used version of the ever-handy, pocket-sized Gotham street guide a few years ago and found it incredibly useful - exactly the kind of thing one might want to have when navigating a large and unfamiliar city.

Wow, was I in for a shock.

Please consult the above photo. On the left you will see the ubiquitous NFT New York. At a svelte 4" x 5 3/4" and 9.5 oz, it fits conveniently in almost any purse, bag, or cargo-pant pocket, as it should since it's meant to be used on the go.

The behemoth to the right is NFT LA. All I have to say is, What the hell?? This monster measures 6 1/2" x 9" and weighs in at 30.5 ounces. That's right, almost two pounds! I think there are laptops lighter than this thing. Okay, I realize this is probably intended to be used in a car, but still...what the hell??

Now, it is true that NFT NY cheats a little - it doesn't really cover the whole city. Outside of Manhattan, only a few select neighborhoods in downtown Brooklyn (BoCoCa, anyone?), Astoria, Long Island City, Hoboken and Jersey City are deemed worthy of detailed cartography. The rest of the "outer boroughs" are breezed over with one large-scale map each.

But still, there can be only one gloomy conclusion to this travel guide travesty. To be considered "not a tourist" in LA, you must possess approximately 220% more geographical knowlege (calculating by volume) than in New York. And possess a glove compartment or a really big bag.

i'm just a girl

The LA Times recently published an illuminating article with the forthright title "Film directing is still a man's world," about the dearth of female directors in feature film. For a young woman preparing to enter the film industry, the statistics are not encouraging. All 30 of the top 30 top-grossing films of 2007 were directed by men. Of the 250 top-grossing films, only 6% were directed by women. In fact, this figure has actually declined from 9% ten years ago--despite, as the article points out, the healthy number of women producers and the presence of women as heads of several major studios. In the whole history of the Oscars, only three women - three! -have even been nominated for Best Director, and none have won.

"If you were looking at Hollywood's history through a gender lens," the article's author perceptively observes, "you might say the industry went straight from male domination to post-feminism without ever enjoying a true feminist age."

Sadly, this statement seems to be proven by several influential women interviewed in the article. Sony Pictures Co-Chairman Amy Pascal, who "has hired more female directors than any studio head..."

...says summer movies just aren't an area of interest for most women. "It simply may be a matter of self-selection, since most studio films are aimed at young boys," she says. "Look at my summer slate. I don't think there's a woman who would've wanted to direct 'Hancock' or 'Pineapple Express.'"

Um...hello?! Antihero superhero? Stoner action movie? Those both sound awesome! I personally would love a chance to direct either of those movies. Will Smith has some mysterious charm that can make even syrupy dreck like The Pursuit of Happyness mildly watchable. And who wouldn't want to hitch a ride on the Apatow-and-friends train to Awesomeville these days?

All the studio heads (and some of the female directors) quoted in this article seem to be laboring under the assumption that women only want to direct certain kinds of movies. And I am sure there are female filmmakers out there who want only to work on small, "character-driven," explosion-free dramas or comedies which will be marketed to other women. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. As I am not one of those people, however, it stands to reason that not all female filmmakers fall into this category.

The subjects of the last 5 screenplays I've worked on in class have been: robots, Macbeth set in Vegas, political intrigue in Latin America, immigrant family running from unscrupulous immigration cops, and a coming-of-age story about a 20-something guy who discovers his father had a secret other family. Four out of these five scripts have a male protagonist. (One has a robot protagonist who looks like a human female.) Their genres can be loosely classified as sci-fi, thriller, action, thriller, drama. I would not call any of them chick flicks. In fact, I would call all of them "guy movies."

I would say that I tend to write guy movies because I tend to like guy movies. And if I, a humble film student, would much rather work on Indiana Jones (aliens and all) than Sex and the City, I am sure that there are any number of talented, experienced female directors out there who feel the same way. I find it hard to believe, as DreamWorks Co-Chairman Stacey Snider snidely states, that "there just isn't a very wide pool of talent to choose from."

The article also contains a link to a very interesting DGA Quarterly interview with six successful female directors. Some of these women point out that there are more opportunities for women in television, where the sheer number of creative opportunities helps level the playing field a bit. Of course, television is not exactly a magical land of opportunity, either. Discussing one popular crime show that has supposedly only hired one female director in its run, prolific TV director Lesli Linka Glatter comments: "No one would ever say, 'We hired a white guy, and it didn't work. So we're not going to hire any more white guys.'"

As an aspiring member of the next generation of filmmakers, I have to operate on the assumption that there's some hope out there. Perhaps the most promising development, as the women in the DGA interview point out, is the rise of so-called new media, the Internet, and digital video, which has the potential to put the tools of filmmaking into many more hands than ever before. If any idiot with a webcam can become world-famous on Youtube, I can only hope that some of those hands will belong to some of the many talented women out there.

oooh, rights! just what i always wanted!

So, I wasn't going to start this blog until much closer to my move date, but then this happened, and, I dunno, I thought it was kinda relevant.

So gay marriage is legal in California...maybe.  Pending a 30-day waiting period.  Unless the state supreme court decides to grant a stay until November.  When gay marriage could potentially become illegal again if right-wingers succeed in getting their anti-marriage proposition on the ballot and enough people vote for it.

Now, I must say that I was not one of those little girls who started planning my wedding at age seven. When I did have to design my own wedding for a project in 8th grade French class (what kind of message is that sending?), I set it on the moon.

My attitude toward marriage is, at best, conflicted.  I am not at all sure I want to participate in an institution that was developed for the express purpose of enshrining property rights and enforcing gender inequality.  Traditional marriage, at least in this country, involves a lot of traditions that I find somewhat fucked-up.  I have no interest in being "given away" by my father (as if I'm his to give), or in promising to "honor and obey" anyone.  Those particular traditions aside, I have never felt a burning need for my relationship to receive an official governmental stamp of approval.

However, I must admit that when the headline popped up on my New York Times afternoon update, the following thought ran through my head:

Gay marriage is legal in California.  Wait a minute...I'm gay!  And I'm moving to California!  I could get married!

Even though I thought about it some more and realized that I don't particularly need or want to be married at this exact moment in time, I don't think I'm the only gay out there who's had this thought.

It occurred to me that gay marriage is like watching a Joss Whedon show on Fox--you feel like you have to enjoy it now, because you never know when it could be taken away.

Take the nice people in the photo at the top of my post, for example.  The adorable Shelly and Ellen have been together for nearly three and a half decades!  Do you see how they've crossed out the "30" on their sign and made it "34"?  That's because this sign is from four years ago, when gay marriage briefly became legal in San Francisco.  We went through this same thing four years ago.  Shelly and Ellen have already been married once.  Their marriage was declared null and void, along with about 4,000 other peoples'.  If the California courts decide to allow marriages to start after the 30-day waiting period, and then the anti-gay referendum passes in November, Shelly and Ellen could have the distinct pleasure of having their marriage invalidated twice!

Now, there are some people on the left who say we shouldn't be fighting for gay marriage at all. They argue that marriage is an outdated, heteronormative institution.  They make the very valid point that access to many things that affect people's lives, such as health insurance and green cards, shouldn't be linked to marriage at all.

I agree with these arguments in theory.  I think fighting for things such as universal healthcare and less draconian immigration policy is critically important.  I think a law mandating civil unions for all couples, thereby breaking one of this country's deepest links between church and state, would be a great idea.  (For some reason, such a bill has yet to be introduced in Congress.)

Whether or not you think we should be fighting for gay marriage does not change the fact that a fight is going on.  And when I look at Shelly and Ellen, and then I look at some of the people who want to amend California's constitution to make gay marriage illegal, I have no doubt as to which side I'm on.

I think there are lots of people who have strong, healthy, long-term relationships and never feel the need to get married. And there are lots of people who get married for the wrong reasons and end up miserable. There are many reasons people decide to get married, or decide not to get married. "Does the government allow it?" shouldn't be one of them.

A lot of things are still up in the air regarding the situation in California.  One thing is certain, though: I will be registering to vote in California as soon as humanly possible!

peace out for now,

Laura

i can has blog?

So, I was always one of those people who was like, "Dude, I'll never start a blog. My life just isn't that interesting--to me, or to anyone else."

In the grand scheme of the world, that statement is probably still true (after all, it's not like I'm blogging from Iraq or anything). However, it did occur to me that if I ever did something reasonably interesting, I might like to try documenting it and see how it goes. I was partially inspired by my ex-co-workers Eric and Maha, who both went off and did something interesting and wrote about it, and by friend-of-a-friend-of-a-friend Rachael Wylie, who did something much more involved, wrote about it, and runs with the coolest Christians I know.

Well, I am not moving to Nicaragua. But, as it turns out, in a few months' time I will be moving from the East Coast, where my girlfriend, all of my immediate family, and most of my friends reside, to Los Angeles, a city I have never visited and once swore I would never live in. Concurrent with this move, I will be starting my MFA in screenwriting at the University of Southern California, something I have wanted to do for a while but am quite shocked to discover is actually happening.

I have determined that this qualifies as interesting enough to write about. Hell, it may even be interesting enough to read about...if you know me and have way too much time on your hands. In this blog, I will attempt to document that which I find relevant about my cross-country trek, my new city, my grad school experience, and anything else going on in the world I feel I have something to say about--and if you know me, you know that last category is a big one. Over time, I may change the focus of the blog or decide to write about new things. Hey, maybe I will even do something else interesting one day.

So stay tuned for further developments...

- Laura