Remembering Desert Storm

Image from Rolling Thunder's Facebook Page

It seems this one has long been forgotten. We hear consistently about our troops coming home from the current seemingly never ending Middle East war that's supposedly no longer a war. Politics aside, they are still there fighting, and they're coming home needing a lot of assistance, physical and mental, that is falling through and failing them. We all, or many of us, agonize about that, as we should.

Yesterday, though, marked the 25th Anniversary of the start of Desert Storm, the 400 hour war after a several month buildup to be prepared, that achieved its objective quickly, freed Kuwait from Iraq's violent takeover, and then sent our troops back home.

Perhaps it's largely forgotten because it was so fast. Few troops had to lose their lives to free others. We went, drove the intruders back, and left, leaving only a small protective contingent. Yes, there are many political fallout issues that we could bring up, but that's not the point of my post.

The point is we shouldn't forget our well played quick victories. We should remember them. We also should remember that during Desert Shield and Desert Storm is when the country rallied full force for our military, starting what luckily has become an on-going "Support Our Troops" quest. In early 1991, nearly every house in rural America, and even in some city areas, flags were flown in support, often with yellow ribbons attached. People were wearing red, white, and blue. Support magnets showed up on cars everywhere you looked. The country was maybe as undivided as it has ever been, at least in troop support.

Of course there were still the protesters. There were still the ignorant civilians who spit on troops as they arrived home or went about their daily business, knowing full well our troops are not allowed to do one thing about it. We will always have ignorance. It's a part of every society.

Back then, though, if anyone heard of such an act, it fueled anger and more support.

Now...

I suppose one effect of a long drawn-out war with no clear goal has to numb the general population to some extent. It does not at all numb the troops and families directly involved, however. We mustn't forget them, no matter how long it runs. We lose ourselves as a nation when we forget those who sacrifice for us.

It's hard for me to believe Desert Storm was 25 years ago. My grandchildren are now about the age my daughter was when her father left to serve. She was nearly two when he left and just over 2 when he came home, the second birthday he'd had to miss because duty called. Watching the news casts with that huge pit in my stomach wondering just what part of the thing he was in (since my protective soldier didn't want me to worry more than necessary and wouldn't tell me until he was home), on the 24th of February, 1991 when the Storm hit, and wondering if my baby girl would ever really know her father because he was away helping other mothers and babies, is a feeling you can't understand until you're there.

Police spouses understand, of course. On a regular basis. Especially those in rougher areas. And we should never forget that, either.

These days, most of the military novels I've read or heard about deal with soldiers coming back from war with PTSD,. I understand it's an issue. I understand they are not getting the right help. Mainly, they get drugs thrown at them that often only make it worse and nothing more.

Those guys coming back from the front lines of Desert Storm didn't "have PTSD" as in, it wasn't a thing yet. They dealt with it. Their families dealt with it. It was a different time with more and less support.

But I got off track...

Not all soldiers are going in for help with mental issues that come with every war. Some of them, most of them, dust themselves off, pick themselves up (with any luck they'll have family support as they do so), and continue their paths in or out of the service. We don't hear much about them. We never hear much about those quietly dealing with their own issues and managing to live good, productive lives despite whatever personal horrors they have faced or are facing. That's sad. We should. They are the majority. We should remember that, as well.

If you want to meet one, fictionally but very realistically, you're welcome to check out my Desert Storm based book, Moondrops & Thistles. I won't link it here because that's not what this post is about. Look it up if you like. My DS vet husband read it and attests to the realism. What I didn't know from experience, I asked him or other DS vets about, in particular, the aviation parts of the story.

If you're too young to know what Desert Storm is, do some research. If you've forgotten, especially the patriotic fervor of the time, try to remember. Our history matters. It's part of us. Look beyond what history class teaches you. There's so much more out there that explains what we don't already
know. Knowing matters.

John Jakes' Kent Family Chronicles is a nice place to start.

What other American History fiction would you recommend? What do you remember about Desert Storm? (Keep in mind this blog is run by a military(RET) spouse and attack comments will be promptly deleted.)

Book Review: Fire Eyes by Cheryl Pierson

Fire Eyes
Cheryl Pierson

The Wild Rose Press
ISBN 1-60154-470-7
available in Ebook & print

Kaedon Turner is a federal marshal in the days just after the War Between The States. After his parents are killed by Indians, Kaed is rescued and raised by the Choctaw before setting off on his own path, first as a soldier, than as a marshal. When he is severely beaten trying to rescue two young Choctaw girls, the Indians rescue him and drop him at the door of Jessica Monroe.

Jessica is a young widow caring for a baby not her own in the wild Oklahoma Territory. While taking care of the marshal and nursing him back to health, she finds herself falling for his advances. He shows a promise of giving her the attention and devotion she never received from her husband. Still, she’s wary, especially when she learns he’s on the track of the notorious Andrew Fallon – the man who murdered her husband.

Both Kaed and Jessica enter the story with plenty of personal baggage. Fire Eyes is the story of how they face their own intimate fears while battling external dangers. Jessica is afraid of the Choctaw and of allowing herself to trust Kaed. He, in return, is haunted by his own loss and determined not to feel it again. Along with these two deep, true-to-life characters are several supporting characters we get to know well and care about. Fallon is one of the most evil villains you’ll run across, complete with background. The side story of two young girls who escaped Fallon’s clutches is endearing and adds a wider scope to the whole picture.

Along the way, we get lush detail of the landscape as well as some historical background of the times. Cheryl Pierson has a knack for creating intensity with both description and plot that refuses to let you out of the story until you’ve read the whole thing, and even then, it stays with you. There are no clichès concerning the ‘wild west’ or Native American life. I wasn’t always fully convinced that the group of marshals would be quite so open with their emotions as they were, but at least they did have emotion instead of being impervious to their pasts and present (ie John Wayne). 

Overall, Fire Eyes is a smooth, realistic read with wonderful characterization, real dialogue, and an absorbing fullness. Any reader interested in romance and westerns will enjoy this one!

A light note of caution: this is on the spicier side of non-erotic romance in places, but readers can easily move past those short scenes if bothered by them.

The Times in Music

There’s something about waking up to Quarterflash’s “Harden My Heart” and then moving on to The Fray’s “You Found Me” that makes you stop and think.

Harden My Heart:

"All of my life I’ve been waitin’ in the rain. I’ve been waitin’ for a feeling that never, ever came. It came so close but always disappeared. Darlin’ in my wildest dreams I never thought I’d go, but it’s time to let you know … I’m gonna harden my heart. I’m gonna swallow my tears. I’m gonna turn and leave you here.”

You Found Me:

"And I’ve been calling for years and years and years and years, And you never left me no messages, You never sent me no letters, You got some kind of nerve taking all I want! .. Lost and insecure, you found me, you found me, Lying on the floor, where were you? Where were you? Just a little late, you found me, you found me!

Think about this a minute…

For those who aren’t pop music buffs, Harden My Heart came out in the Eighties. It’s fairly typical of Eighties pop. The music is “simpler” in that you hear the different parts of the music clearly and it all blends together. There’s a sharpness about it and the lead singer stands out from the music while still working with it.

You Found Me came out in 2007 and was recorded in 2008. It’s also fairly typical of today’s music. There’s a “mush” feel where all the sounds seem to run together and it’s hard to differentiate one from the other, including the lead’s voice. We hear the words because they’re louder but it’s still part of the mush. The instruments are less sharp. There’s more “extra” stuff that jumbles it all together. Okay, I’m not a music critic and am not qualified to be, but Youtube these two songs and you’ll get what I mean.

The lyrics are my focus for this entry. I am a word critic. That’s part of my job. So yes, I analyze songs for their lyrics. The differences here are amazing. Harden My Heart: things are tough for her, she’s been hurt and betrayed and feels lost. So what will she do about it? Get together. Deal with it. Move on. It’s part of life and it’s her job to handle it as she needs. You Found Me: things are tough, he’s feeling lost and betrayed. So what will he do about it? Find God (smoking on a street corner, btw) and rant to him about why He’s letting bad things happen to him and those he cares about.

Yes, huge difference here in lyrics, and in attitude. But then, they reflect the times from when they were written. Song lyrics from the late Sixties to early Seventies tend to be pretty similar in attitude as You Found Me. In truth, there was a lot of whining about the lack of fairness of things. It’s all over the music, set in its history. The late Seventies and early Eighties pushed that aside and took command. Whining was suddenly for wimps, and the Eighties weren’t going to be wimps. They’d stand up and take care of things that went wrong and move on.

I’m also not a political science expert, but I can tell you I sure appreciate the Eighties attitude of “can do” that we had naturally. We didn’t have to be told we could, or persuaded to maybe think we could. We could. And we did. Sure, times change. Things are hard. But then, things are always hard. That will never change. It’s our attitude about it that makes the difference.

Me, I’m a harden my heart and move along kind of gal. That’s the kind of music I listen to by choice, also. Yes, I’m an Eighties girl. I graduated high school in 1984 listening to Quarterflash and Huey Lewis and the News (It’s Alright) and Sawyer Brown (Shakin’) and Joan Jett (I Love Rock and Roll) and Michael Jackson. 

I keep wanting to ask the guy asking where God was when things were tough, “What were you doing about it?” 
-

Author Interview: Joanna Waugh

Blind Fortune
Joanna Waugh

Regency Historical Romance
322 pages
ISBN:9781419959028

buy link: Cerridwen Press

Read My Review on CRR 

LK: When I first heard about Blind Fortune and saw the cover featuring music, I knew this was a story I wanted to read. The combination of music and history was compelling enough, and then I got to know Joanna through mutual writing sites. Through her daily writings I could see she was well-studied in both her story matter and in the writing craft. I also enjoy her informative blog posts about the Regency period of England as often as I can get to them. As impressed as I was with the story of Lady Fortuna Morley and Charles, Marquess of Granville, I’m honored to have Joanna here talking about her debut novel. Welcome, Joanna!  
 

Joanna Waugh: Thanks so much for inviting me in today, Loraine. And thanks for the great review of BLIND FORTUNE.

The first question I always ask is if you have a response to my review. Is there anything you'd like to highlight or argue?

JW: I only want to say how pleased I am you liked the book. The feedback from readers and reviewers has been heartwarming. I’m overwhelmed by the positive response BLIND FORTUNE has received.

It’s all well deserved! Debut novels tend to be a huge learning curve and I think you’re starting ahead of the game. Speaking of starts, as I mentioned in the review, the amount of research you did for the novel is impressive. Are you a researcher by nature?

JW: I think so. I discovered I had a knack for it in the late 1980s when I researched my husband’s family tree. I was able to ferret out information about his great grandfather others had spent a decade trying to track down. Later, this talent stood me in good stead when I became involved politically. I think I would have made an excellent investigative reporter!

Yes, I’m guessing you would, also. Family tree research is an admirable skill, and tedious. I’ll bypass the political question that’s skimming my brain since I try not to do that here ;-) and move on.  

The Regency Period covers England in the late 18th to mid-19th centuries. How long have you been interested in this era? Did you grow up reading Regencies? If not, what was your favorite reading material?

JW: My mother belonged to Book of the Month Club and I grew up on authors like Mary Stewart and Daphne du Maurier. I had a voracious reading appetite. By junior high, I was sneaking into the grown up section of the public library. I couldn’t borrow the books so I’d sit there all day, every Saturday, reading them.

Mom loved history and historical romance. She still does. I remember once, when I was in grade school, the Kroger store had a special promotion of young adult biographies. Every week Mom bought me a new one – George Washington, Stephen Decatur, Abraham Lincoln, Louisa May Alcott. I loved American history! But I got hooked on the English Regency when I discovered Georgette Heyer as an adult.

How wonderful of your Mom to feed that interest! I started reading historicals because Mom did, as well, particularly with John Jakes and Irving Stone. I may have to look up Georgette Heyer.

Joanne, as well as history, I sensed a love of art in general from within "Blind Fortune" and had to go peruse your website to fulfill my curiosity. Can I say I'm not surprised you studied art? Now I have to say I also began college heading toward commercial art and changed paths, as well as also being pulled out of college for marriage. This is leading to two questions:

Was your art love a planned theme for this novel or did it appear as you wrote?

JW: How wonderful we have so much in common, Loraine!

Most blind people possess an affinity for music so it seemed logical that Lady Fortuna would play the pianoforte by ear. And because music speaks so deeply to the soul, I knew it had to be important to my emotionally wounded hero, Charles Lowden, as well.

Music, art and classical literature were an integral part of 19^th century life. Some of the greatest painters of the 18^th and 19^th centuries came out of England—Joshua Reynolds, John Constable, JMW Turner. William Hogarth and Thomas Rowlandson were wildly popular with their satires of English life.

Remember, this was before photography. The only way to memorialize a scene or person was in a painting or illustration.

That’s something I didn’t know about the blind. Interesting. And I’m applauding your point about music and healing. Speaking personally about the soul, did your own experiences play a role in Lady Fortuna's feelings and fears about married life or about life for women in general?

JW: I wrote BLIND FORTUNE based on personal experiences with my husband’s loss of sight from diabetes. Most human communication is nonverbal so he often misunderstood conversations. It struck me as an excellent premise around which to craft a romance.

I tried to imagine what life would have been like for a blind woman of good birth during the Regency. But the story really came together when I read Mary Wollstonecraft’s Maria or The Wrongs of Woman published in 1798.

Women of the Georgian and Regency periods were owned body and soul by the men in their lives. In BLIND FORTUNE, Lady Fortuna fears a husband might lock her away once he gets his hands on her dowry. It’s a legitimate concern, given how little time alone courting couples were allowed in order to get to know one another. An unscrupulous man could hide behind exemplary behavior until the marriage vows were exchanged.

In Mary Wollstonecraft’s world, a woman’s identity was subsumed with that of her husband when she wed. People literally believed the biblical doctrine “two become as one flesh.” Divorce was almost unheard of and required Parliamentary approval. Once married, a woman was trapped for life.

Ah, I read part of “The Wrongs of Woman” as part of a women’s literature class some time ago. Powerful writing. It’s amazing how far women have come and we need to pay homage to women such as Wollstonecraft for helping that come about. I’m glad you mentioned her.

As romance writers, we know there is a tendency for the general public to look down on romance novels. And yet, they are the best selling genre consistently. I know from your website that women's issues are important to you and you've done a fair amount of research in that vein. Do you think there's a connection between a general degrading of romance and 'chick flicks' that relates to women's fight for equal recognition?

JW: You are right that women’s issue are close to my heart. In the early 1980s, when my husband lost his sight, I needed to find a better job to support my family. As a union employee with the local gas and electric company, I was able to leave my clerical position and become the first female journeyman electric meterman.

As a writer, particularly an American one, I can’t help but bring this experience to my stories. Unfortunately, it makes them less true historically. I mentioned before that women of the 19^th century were at the mercy of the men in their lives. Most of them were content with this position. But that attitude doesn’t resonate with 21^st century women. More of them are entering the military; more are opting to have children outside of marriage. It’s difficult for them to identify with the past as it truly was so an author sometimes must bend the truth to fit modern sensibilities.

I think you did a nice job showing both, balancing the historical aspect with the needs of modern fiction.  I also have to think many women were not content with that slavery but unsure how to go about changing it. It was widespread battered women/victim syndrome where only the strongest dared fight it.

To lighten things up again, what is your favorite color? Do you wear this color a lot?

 JW: Blue has always been my favorite. But over the last few years, I’ve gravitated toward purple and lavender. It goes well with my gray hair!

Are you an outdoorsy type or do you prefer being within closed windows?

JW: Despite working outdoors for almost thirty years, I’m not the woodsy type. I don’t camp or hunt. My idea of roughing it is the Holiday Inn! But I do adore walks along Lake Michigan and boating.

There’s another similarity. I agree! So do you have any "different" hobby you'd like to share with us? Do you collect anything outrageous or scuba dive or so on?

JW: I collect Russian nesting dolls. Lovely little works of folk art. I have one whose smallest doll is roughly the size of a sesame seed. And it’s painted. With a magnifying glass you can make out its little smiling face.

Oh, those dolls are precious! I have a set we picked up in Germany but the smallest is nowhere near that small.

Speaking of painting and art, if you could claim one famous work of art as your own, which one would it be and why?

JW: Only one? What an impossible task! Van Gogh’s Starry Night.  Salvador Dali’s Invention of the Monsters with its flaming giraffe and his Persistence of Memory with its melting clocks. I absolutely adore Seurat’s Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte. It’s on display at the Art Institute of Chicago. When my son was in grade school, I took him to see the painting. I dragged him up close before he had a chance to assimilate what the picture was about. Shoving him within inches of the canvas, I asked, “What do you see?” “Dots.” He said. Then I dragged him back and watched the wonder dawn on his face as the picture gradually coalesced. “The original dot matrix image,” I told him.

Joanna! La Grande Jatte is one of my all-time favorite works of art! I saw it at the Art Institute back in my college days after I’d studied it in art history class and it’s amazing. I had to use it in one of my books, I was so struck by the piece. Van Gogh is another fave. I love your picks.

Back to writing, tell us what you're doing now. Any projects in the works?

Right now I’m working on a Regency paranormal set on the border of Scotland in 1816. Home from the war, my hero accidentally releases the 6^th century spirit of a pagan king from a well in which it has been trapped for twelve-hundred years. The spirit follows him home and begins wreaking havoc. The hero and heroine must overcome their differences and work together to banish it. In the process, they rediscover the love they lost two years before.

Sounds like another great read. I’ll be watching for it.

Joanna, thank you for taking the time to be with us. I wish you all the best with future books. I also encourage any art and music loving readers out there to pick up Blind Fortune. Is there anything you would like to add? Be sure to leave us your links to find you!

Check out my resources for Regency readers and writers at http://www.joannawaugh.com

(Click on “Joanna’s Books” to read excerpts from BLIND FORTUNE)

Be sure to “friend” me on Myspace and Facebook

And don’t forget my blog about British customs and holidays at http://www.joannawaugh.blogspot.com/
-

Public Enemies

When a new Johnny movie premieres, I tend to be there opening day. So, we went to see Public Enemies this afternoon, although our local theater wasn't bothering to play it. Yes, I drove the 30 miles on opening day to check out Mr. Depp's newest work.

It was well worth it.

I won't go on about what a great job he did because anyone who has followed him knows he does, and he did. Incredible as usual. But there are many other reasons to see this film.

It's history. John Dillinger was considered a hero by much of the public in the 1930s. It was in the midst of the depression when everyone was angry about how the banks handled things so badly and people lost so much (sound familiar?). Dillinger grabbed lots of it, but never took it from individuals inside the bank, telling them he didn't want their money, only the bank's. Of course there's a bit of logic missing there since people fund the bank money, but only to an extent. They're making bunches off our money and they did then, and when they mismanage it's of course not only their money they lose. So in a time of no sympathy with or high opinion of bankers, Dillinger struck gold with public opinion.

It's societal. I don't want to say too much and spoil anything but there are points made that we need to consider as a society. Dillinger was considered Public Enemy Number One. But what of the Chicago cops taking bribes from gangsters to leave them alone? What of the police brutality? What about being overly punished for minor offenses? Those things build the criminal element, as they helped to build Dillinger's power and public sympathy for him. And they still happen.

It does not glamorize criminal life. It shows straight out the costs, very high costs, of taking that route, with no actual gain. A good lesson there.

It's artistic. This film was very well made. It's not overly gory for being a gangster film. It has beautiful effects that add to the imagery without being over the top. It truly is art, which I don't find a lot of on the big screen anymore.

It's well worth watching. It's even worth supporting, something I also don't find much in Hollywood these days.

The next one I look forward to is The Ugly Truth. That should be a riot!
-

live creatively free

To live creatively free, do what you know how to do now then 'act as if' you know how to do the rest."
Sark

How closely should art force itself to follow reality?

In many ways, art has to be more real than reality. Fiction has to make sense to readers. Life doesn't have to make sense. In fiction, each story has a beginning, a climax, and an ending where everything comes together in some kind of tidy manner. Life isn't so tidy. Things don't make that much sense in our real worlds. The problem comes when the two mix and mingle, such as in historical novels and movies.

300, the film starring Gerard Butler, an actor who is finally getting mainstream recognition after many years of being largely and unfairly ignored, is getting incredible reviews. The story of the few trying to overcome the many has echoes of so many situations we see on a daily basis that it has become irresistable to audiences. Let me say first that I have yet to see it. I will. It's actually one I would wait for the video since, although I love history, I don't watch many war movies of any kind. I do have plans to see it in the theater, though, simply to help support this actor and help push him further into mainstream view. I like that it doesn't have a bunch of huge names in it, also. The focus here seems to be the story line and acting ability instead of name-dropping. I have to appreciate that.

I did read one review of a history buff whose son (also a history buff) went to see it and came back complaining that it was historically inaccurate. I found myself on both sides of the issue. I also love history. I feel it's very important to understand history if we are to understand the present and future. However, I'm also a fiction writer and understand the basic elements stories have to have in order to pull and mesmerize audiences. The intended audience for such a film expects action and splendor and scenery (which kind of scenery may depend on gender) and without it, regardless of how historically accurate it might be, the reviews won't move it past the preview weekend.

The point of a movie, its main theme, is what an audience will remember if it's done well. Does the director's vision for what s/he wants the audience take home allow the right to artistically recreate history? Maybe. What is the point of knowing history? Remembering each detail or learning from its message? I tend to think it's the message that's important. Memorizing each date of each event in high school and college history classes seemed insane to me. They weren't going to be remembered past the test date. However, what I got from the story of it, I kept.

Movies are fiction, unless they are specifically labelled as documentaries. If they make us stop and think, then maybe we'll go do the research ourselves. If we don't research, then we at least get the main point of the story. There is not one historical novel, including those hailed as classics, that does not play with historical fact to make it work within the story. Does it invalidate the history? Of course not. Will it lead readers to do more research on the time period to get more actual facts? Not very often. Most readers and viewers want entertainment. If they can learn a fact or two along with it, that's great, but those who want non-fiction read non-fiction or watch documentaries instead.

By the way, it's hard to tell how much of what we learn in our history books is actual history, as well. It's all slanted by whoever is telling the tale and by the individual teachers injecting their personal opinions. History always has been. Are the facts actual facts? Were they fictionalized in the first place to make them more interesting? Possibly.

Nothing written or spoken is ever done without the viewpoint of the writer or speaker involved. Nothing heard is ever taken in without the viewpoint of the one doing the hearing mixing it with personal opinion. At least in fiction, we are saying outright, "This is not fact. This is a story of my own creation in which I mixed real things with non-real things with imagination with personal opinion with belief with wants with needs...." Will the reader still get something worthwhile out of it? Of course.