Over on the MUA Skin Care Board, sunscreen is a hot topic. Sometimes gets very heated. Often the most impassioned people are sincere, to the point of extreme bravery and the risk of flouting The Rules and getting themselves Deleted (a fate worse than actual death in the real world, you understand). Take for example this exchange, a classic case of lots of people being simultaneously right and in the right, complicated by misreadings, misinformation, misconstruals, misinterpretation, and any other sorts of misunderstandings you might care to mention:

I got to the party too late to comment (alas, work: my loss, doubtless everyone else’s gain, including work…). My only comment would be to praise my friend the elfin one to the high heavens for her courtesy, tolerance, and good humour. A real lady.

There should always be room for discussion and disagreement: but reasonably and rationally.

Be nice to one another and look after (and out for) each other, guys…

On a happier and constructive note: some useful new-ish stuff on sunscreens and not caving to the craven fear of nanoparticles, and knee-jerk irrational reactions, playing into the hands of fear-mongers and letting The Bad Guys win:

• Australians risking skin cancer to avoid nanoparticles (Physorg.com, 2012-02-09): thanks SayItLoud
• Scientists assess safety of nanopaticles in sunscreen using laser imagining (Cosmeticsdesign.com, 2011-12-01): thanks JoshuaP

]]> http://hknaturalsoap.wordpress.com/2012/02/06/how-to-pamper-your-skin/ Mon, 06 Feb 2012 04:11:37 +0000 HurriKayn Natural Soap http://hknaturalsoap.wordpress.com/2012/02/06/how-to-pamper-your-skin/ Factors Affecting Your Skin & How To Pamper Your Skin…

Although your skin type is basically constant throughout your life, some lifestyle choices and environmental factors can affect how your skin behaves.

1. Sleep. Get 7-8 hours a night. Benefit: Your skin renews itself by building new cells while you sleep.

2. Vitamin C. Eat vitamin C-rich foods and take a supplement for extra insurance. Benefit: Vitamin C is a potent free-radical scavenger that’s known for its corrective and preventative benefits for sun- and environmentally-damaged skin.

3. Water. Drink 6-8 glasses of filtered water per day. Benefit: improved circulation and accelerated cell growth. Make sure you add Pure Inventions Green Tea Extracts to your water.

4. Exercise. Regularly. Benefit: moving around helps revive circulation and speeds blood flow to the surface of your skin. Stress. Relax your mind by exercising your body. Especially unclench your facial muscles. Benefit: Relieving stress can mean avoiding blemishes, hives, color loss and under-eye circles. One more thing – your mother was right: Habitually tense facial expressions can create permanent lines.

5. The “no-no’s.” Avoid them. Your skin hates alcohol, tobacco and caffeine, and will show you by losing moisture or forming wrinkles that make you look older sooner. Avoid the no-no’s and get this benefit: You’ll look younger longer. (Be aware that some medications can make skin more sensitive.)

6. Natural aging. As we age our skin becomes drier and loses elasticity, which can cause wrinkles and fine lines. How to manage: Use a specially formulated age-defying moisturizer at night to nourish and renew your skin and reduce the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles.

7. Sun is the most damaging of all environmental factors. Continued exposure damages and wrinkles your skin. Sun exposure is also a major cause of skin cancer. How to manage: Avoid long exposure and use a facial moisturizer with sunscreen – every day. At night use a renewal moisturizer to repair damage.

8. Low humidity. Low humidity robs your skin of essential moisture, while high humidity can make skin feel oily. How to manage: Nourish your skin with a good moisturizer to fight low humidity. In high humidity, that oily feeling isn’t moisture – you still need a moisturizer that will help protect skin from dryness.

9. Extreme temperatures. Both cold and hot temperatures with low humidity deplete moisture from your skin and leave it tight and dry. How to manage: Nourish skin with a good moisturizer. Another hint: Use lukewarm, not hot or cold water to rinse your face.

10. Wind. Strong wind, especially with extreme temperatures and low humidity, can cause dry, flaky skin. How to manage: Re-hydrate with a good moisturizer.

11. Air pollution. Windborne dust, dirt, and smog can clog pores and choke your skin. How to manage: Protect your skin with a good moisturizer that forms a “barrier” between you and that nasty stuff floating around you. Carefully cleanse and condition every night.

HurriKayn Natural Soap

Over the last few days, I have been viewing a lot of ads and videos on line regarding natural skincare options. I can’t express enough how important it is to READ THE LABELS on your favorite products and learn what those ridiculously long words actually mean. We love Campaign for Safe Cosmetics. Our labels have simple and to the point ingredients on them. All of them. No secrets here. Why don’t all manufacturers of products make it simple for you to understand what the heck they put in your product? We urge you to support and patronize those companies that produce naturally made, organic, sustainable products. From your food to your clothes to your skin care, it matters! It would be great if those products that are best for us would be more affordable to us. You would be amazed at how affordable the healthier alternatives can be. I sure was. Sometimes some of those products are less expensive at the specialty stores like Whole Foods Market than at your local grocery store. I found organic butternut squash about $.40 per pound cheaper one day at Whole Foods than the non organic ones at the store just around the corner from me. I’m a bargain shopper so believe me, it didn’t take me long to figure out how and where to get my healthier alternative products at prices that I can afford. Sometimes I learned that I just had to suck it up and pay for what I wanted, healthier options. My toothpaste and deoderant are not cheap but I just found my mineral deoderant spray for a couple of dollars cheaper at our local Grocery Outlet than I just paid at Super Supplements a few weeks ago! Who knew that they carried so many natural products. Read the labels though. Toms has many products that look like they are the same but if you read the labels, some have SLS or propylene glycol and some don’t. What is that! Jason has a great natural toothpaste as well as Kiss My Face. The FDA would have us believe that a certain percentage of some of those cancer causing chemicals are safe for us. HELLO!! By the time you take a shower, wash your hair, put on deoderant, lotion your body and brush your teeth, you’ve layered on quite a few percentages of toxic chemicals onto your skin. Your skin is your largest organ and you absorb about 60% of everything you put on your skin. That’s just toxins on the outside. You haven’t even eaten breakfast yet!!
We just want you to be aware, educated and make conscious decisions about how to live a long and healthy life for you and your family.
Signing off for now and keeping it natural.

HurriKayn Natural Soap

Let us know your thoughts on this!

"study time" by calebcherry shared with CC license via Flickr

First, I recommend getting a book. The good, old-fashioned kind made of paper. Sure, you can read a lot of books on fancy gadgets like Kindles, Nooks, and even iPads, but you probably won’t read as quickly as you would read a book, and apparently, reading a book feels more relaxing.

I’m of the opinion that you don’t need utter silence to read, but studies show that college students who don’t normally listen to music when they read will comprehend less in a setting where music is playing (print out the study for your music-blasting roommate, if needed). Essentially, read somewhere that is comfortable for you.

Get a notebook and pen (perhaps even one with varying ink colors). I’m sure some of you will want to pull out your laptops, but writing things down can be faster and allow you to perform equally well down the road. Also, students in my class will not take any of the course exams on a laptop — they’ll be writing using pen and paper — so, it’s best to be consistent while also boosting your handwriting skills.

Then, I recommend using the SQ4R method (similar to the SQ3R method). SQ4R stands for: Survey, Question, Read, Respond, Record, Review:

S = Survey
Before you crack open your book to page one and dive in, take a few minutes to read the preface and introduction to the text, and browse through the table of contents and the index. This will tell you the main topics that the book will cover, the author’s particular approach to the subject (i.e., why he/she wrote another text on the subject when there are probably twenty on the market), and what the basic organizational structure will be.

Q = Question
Before beginning to read, take the subtitle of the section (or the first sentence of a paragraph) and turn it into a question. For example, if you’re reading part of a chapter called “Functions of the Spinal Cord,” ask yourself, “What are the functions of the spinal cord?”

R#1 = Read
You then read, not passively sliding your eyes over the words, but actively engaging the text, trying to find the answer to your question. Be cautious, however, that you don’t end up skimming for the answer to your question and missing other important information.

R#2 = Respond
Once you’ve read the section, close the textbook and answer your question, either orally or on paper, in your own words. If you can’t answer the question, you should reread that section until you can. If, after several tries, you still can’t answer your question, go on to the next few sections and see if things become clearer. You may find that you need to change your question. For example, you may have first posed the question, “What is the Treaty of Versailles?” for the subtitle “The Treaty of Versailles,” but, after reading the section, you may find that a better question is, “;Why was the Treaty of Versailles created?” If changing your question doesn’t help clarify the reading, it’s time to get some help. Your instructor or TA are good places to start, or Learning Services in the Learning Commons can also help with effective reading strategies.

R#3 = Record
Once you’ve understood the material and can summarize it in your own words, the next step is to record the information in some way. Some common methods are to highlight and/or mark the text, or take notes, or some combination of both. Whichever method or combination of methods you choose (some pros and cons are summarized next), it’s critical to remember to read and understand the material first, and then go back and record.

R#4 = Review
In courses where there is a lot of factual material to remember, a regular review period (usually once a week) can be a very effective strategy for retaining information. Integrating a weekly review period into your study routine will help you remember more of the information longer, thereby changing the nature of the studying done at exam time. Rather than relearning material that has been forgotten because you haven’t looked at it since reading it or writing it down, preparing for an exam can include a review of familiar material and rehearsal strategies like trying old exams.

Essentially, I recommend you read with a purpose (something beyond “because my professor told me to”). If you can think of no other purpose, try reading as devil’s advocate — find ways to disagree with the author’s argument(s). Write things down that assist you in this goal, and think about those things you’ve written. Could you tell a roommate what you learned from the reading, in your own words, in a minute or two?

In case you are interested in more reading tips, I recommend:

• “Active Reading” from Dartmouth’s Academic Skills Center; and
• “Reading Strategies” by Dr. Kathleen King.

If any haba na haba readers have other suggestions, please share them in the comments.
***************************
This post is part of a series on studying in college.

Vitals: this section will give the most basic information about the restaurant including name, location, type of cuisine, and price.

The Five Senses: I am a strong believer that eating a great meal is something that stimulates all of the five senses, therefore I decided to format the review portion of each post into 5 categories

• Ears- noise level in the restaurant
• Hands- the “hands” section will include my opinion of the service and wait staff at the restaurant
• Nose- Cleanliness of the restaurant and bathrooms
• Eyes- The ambiance of the restaurant from the decor to the appearance/plating of the food
• Mouth- Obviously the most important of any review, the mouth section will include my opinions on the taste and flavor of the food. The bulk of the review will most likely be here

Closing Comments: the closing comments section will be just that, my closing comments on the overall dining experience. I will include a rating of the restaurant on a scale from 1-10. “10″ being a near perfect  meal and experience and “1″ being a disgusting place in which I am served a pig slop sandwich by Rosie O’Donnell.

That’s the overall structure each post will have. I reserve the right to change it up as I write more posts and figure out what this whole blog thing is all about . However, if I stray from this intended formula don’t hesitate to steer me back with your comments/replies.

Thanks for reading,

Hope I didn’t scare you off with my long-winded tutorial,

FFF

I’ve been seeing George Eliot’s Middlemarch on lots of lists of best books ever and must read book lists, sometimes at the very top.  So, I decided that I wanted to read it.  I had a public domain version on my kindle, but one of the things that you miss with this is a preface and, especially, a modern preface.

I learned that Oxford Press and Penguin Books make some classics available on a kindle (or other ereader) for very cheap – the Penguin Middlemarch is just US $0.99 and Oxford Press World Classics one was just US $1.99 (but it seems to have gone up to $7.16 now).  One of the things that worries me about always getting the Project Gutenberg or other free version of public domain books is that it may create a disincentive for presses like Oxford and Penguin to continue to make low cost paper versions available.  So, especially since their versions were so inexpensive and because I felt that the prefaces alone would be valuable to me, I chose to buy both (and I made a new rule, copies of a book I already own don’t count toward my limit of acquiring 20 new books this year!).

While I was reading one of the prefaces (the Oxford one with a preface by Felicia Bonaparte – hmmmm, interesting name, having just learned that Monica Dickens is indeed related – a writer and granddaughter of, I wonder…), I read that she recommended that people new to George Eliot (which includes me, fairly new at least) should start with Silas Marner, next read Mill on the Floss, and then read Middlemarch.  I like a project and regular readers of this blog know that I find reading a number of books by the same author (along with biographies and other related books) enriches the experience, so I chose to follow her advice.

But the thing was, I’d read Silas Marner, in high school English class, I think.  And while I loved lots of the books I read there, I remembered Silas Marner as somewhat dreary.  And I’d seen the film (a made for tv version with Ben Kingsley) Silas Marner.  So, I felt I already knew the story and wasn’t exactly excited about the book.

But, I put it on my list anyway, at #139.  And I started to read it.  At the same time, I was reading the first few chapters of #140) Susan Wise Bauer’s The Well-Educated Mind about how and what to read to gain the essence of a classical education (which I got a good chunk of at my first university which specialized in exposing students to “the Great Books” but I specialized in boys and late nights at the time, and so managed to avoid absorbing much of this classical education save for a taste for it).

Bauer lays out a very structured approach to reading with lots of rules: 1) make a character list, 2) write down the author, year, and title at the top of your notes about the book, 3) write down the title of each chapter and summarize it in 1-2 sentences, 4) do lots of notes in the margins and dog ear your copy, 5) read very intentionally, think about what the author is trying to tell you, ask questions of the text and so on.  So, I started doing this with Silas Marner.

And I really liked the experience of trying to follow these rules.  Too often, I get focused on sucking up a book to quickly read the plot and add another book to my “read” list.  I frequently don’t remember what I read or much about the content (hence this blog, one of my goals is to help myself read more intentionally and create a record of what I’ve read and what I thought about it).

I made a character list.  And I noted the name and gist of each chapter.  And I spent more time “interrogating” the text, thinking about Eliot’s choices and points.  This really enriched my reading of the book.  And I found myself savoring each chapter more fully and very much enjoying the book.  It really shifted my approach.

As a scientist and researcher (my day job), one of the things I miss is being a student and getting to write research papers which allowed me to spend lots of time in the library absorbing a literature, taking lots of notes, and synthesizing what I learned.  Following Buaer’s approach put me more in “researcher” mode and I liked it.  Now I wouldn’t necessarily take this approach for a light mystery, but for all these wonderful classics that I’m eager to work my way through and really engage, it works beautifully.

If you have not read Silas Marner, it is the story of Silas, a single man who was thrown out of a religious group, unfairly accused of stealing money from it.  His best friend set him up.  He lost his identify, his fiance, his friend, and his “family.”  As a result, he moved to a new community where he lived in a remote cabin, made his living weaving, became a near-hermit, and refocused his efforts on saving money.

And he LOVED his money: every night he would pull it out and count it, mooning over it like it was a woman.  When his money is stolen, he is again devastated.  But early on, in the course of bringing the community’s attention to the theft and getting their help with investigating it, he begins to build satisfying connections to people.  And soon after, Eppie, the two year old daughter of a drug addict who dies in the snow outside his home, wanders into his house and he adopts her.  Eppie and Silas fall deeply in love and she becomes the center of his life.  His life also comes to include far more people and he is much happier (hmmm, shades of Gretchen Rubin from my last post!).

I very much enjoyed this book.  It’s point was clear: Eliot is saying that it is human connection that makes our lives rich.  That, despite the evil that some people can do, we must trust others in order to create the relationships that make life worth living.  Silas has been devastated twice, but he makes great effort to rebuild his life in order to create a good life for Eppie and he is repaid richly.  Of course, Eliot is a consummate story teller and she peoples the community with a cast of characters with flaws, talents, and goodness that make it seem like a real town.  Her deft plot draws you along wanting to see where the story will lead, even if you basically know where things are going.  Eliot’s sensibilities are very modern (although you can follow the link below to a short piece discussing whether she was a bigot).

George Eliot (source: LA Times, Zionism, anti-Semitism, Richard Wagner and … George Eliot? by Culture Monster.)

And this is one of the things I’ve noticed as I read more and more 19th Century classics – whether it is Zola or Turgenev or Eliot or Trollope or Dickens – is this was the era when the ability to tell a good story was essential to authorial success.  Perhaps this seems obvious, but I think we live in a time where the literary establishment favors more experimental approaches (like those translated and published by Open Letters Press) that don’t necessarily involve much of a plot and don’t keep you hanging on the edge of your seat turning pages.  That’s fine, but I’m not sure it is necessary.  How did the inability to tell a compelling story become required for serious literature?

Ah well, to each his own, but I’m glad to go on and read more Eliot and more of those other fantastic writers….

Happy Reading, Ruby!

My reply was, “Well, I try not to read bad books.”

The problem is, I don’t read very fast—around 200 words a minute (one page). Since I’m such a slow reader, I don’t want to waste my time on the bad stuff. So here are some ways I go about sifting through the garbage in order to find the gold!

1. Read the cover

The book title doesn’t give a lot of explanation, but the subheading often explains in one tweetable sentence what the book is going to be about. For example, the book, Radical, by David Platt could be about anything. Radical Christians. Radical entrepreneurship. Radical eggplant soup. But one glance at the subheading, “Taking Back Your Faith From the American Dream,” carries a theme that focuses on sacrificial living.

2. Read the inlet

Usually, there is a short explication of the subheading on the inside of the leaflet, or on the back cover. These are generally excerpts written by the publisher trying to sell you the book. Even though they’re sometimes embellished (like gossip on Twitter), they still give a decent summary of what the book is going to be about.

3. Read the intro by author

If the concept of the book interests me at this point, I’ll read the author’s introduction. This usually has the author’s reason for writing the book, so you can capture a glimpse of the backdrop behind the book, how well it has impacted the author in the writing process, and whether it may or may not impact you in the reading process..

4. Read the table of contents

I’m not sold on the book until I can resonate with the Table of Contents (TOC). Silly, I know. It’s like saying that I go backstage to a concert to geek out with the coordinator. But while the band plays in an ocean of euphoria, there is an unknown who is coordinating every move in bite-size, digestible chunks. The TOC is like the stage coordinator. It is the most under-utilized part of any book, as we never pay attention to it, yet it shows us the the logical flow of the stories and arguments unfolding into the conclusion. This is where the main concept is broken down into bite-size headlines. This is also where I filter out most books I know I’m going to hate.

5. Read the referrals

I know these are usually over-friendly summaries by the author’s friends, and never carry anything critical—many of the refers don’t even read the books themselves—however, I may gain a little extra information from them. I also like to know that the unknown author I’m reading is supported by authors I know and trust.

6. Read the critical reviews on Amazon

This is where it starts to get critical. Amazon commenters are relentless, brash, and down-right merciless. But they will often write cliff note-esque summaries of the strengths and weaknesses for the book in hand. You can also filter through Amazon reviews by clicking on “most helpful,” “most critical,” etc.

7. Read the first chapter

If the book passes the Amazon test, I start reading the first chapter until I understand the point of the book. It’s hard to miss in the first chapter, because the author is trying to sell you hard within the first twenty pages.

8. Read the last paragraph of the last chapter

A book will usually bring everything together at the end in a nicely packaged conclusion. I almost always skip to this section. I know we hate ruining movies by knowing how it’s going to end, but a book isn’t a movie. We can just sit through a movie while it hand-feeds us a story, but we must think critically about a book in order to move with it towards its conclusion. It helps immensely to know how the book is going to end, and where the author is intending to go—Unless you’re reading a novel…then let it take you there

Read the whole book!

By this time, you’ll have a very good idea whether it’s a decent read or a waste of precious time. These steps sound like a lot, but it will only take about five minutes to go through. The fact is, I would rather waste five minutes going through these steps than three hours reading a bad book!

So if you like the book by this point….read it! It will most likely be a good one.

Do you have any helpful tips on reading?

Writing any work is always a journey (one I believe never really comes to an end, even after publication). I often get asked how I write my poems and short stories by mostly women who would also like to take up writing. The first thing I always say and have always believed is that we write for ourselves. Often times an idea for a story or text will come about because of an interest, passion, hobby or experience we have. I am of the school of thought that believes the writer cannot be separated from the work (unless it is a ghost written piece but even then elements of the ghost writer are written in to the story). The first draft is the space to get out all the emotion and crazy ideas. This draft acts as a remedy almost or for a hobby or passion; it is that fix you needed to stop you obsessing over the idea or topic. By writing you bring the thoughts alive and then use the work as a platform to begin really telling the story in a way that is accessible for the reader.

When I begin to re – draft I always leave at least a week (probably more) before I return with fresh eyes and less emotion. Emotion clouds our judgment and makes us think things are good or necessary when more often than not, they are not. Telling the story in a way that best benefits the reader means that we need to start looking at the text objectively. We need to analyse the syntax, grammar and sectioning of the work; see if there is a way we can better present the work to get the message across better. Despite reading being a subjective act the big contradiction is that in order to get the best emotional response, you need to be as void of emotion as you can be when thinking about the best way to write.

NMx

Quack + smile + lipstick = ?

–or rather, a sardonic grin and as much lip as one can get away with. Think Are You Being Served? and Yes, Minister. Here follows a shaggy-human story, verging on the saga of epic proportions. Within which can be found, it is hoped, useful stuff about the nature of shampoo and conditioner, what happens to your hair when you wash and condition it, how to read an ingredient list–featuring sample readings!–and how to Google shizz. Also, why The Beauty Brains and Bad Science rock, kick ass, and generally Rule OK. Yes, I am a fangirl. Unashamed. And proud of it.

I’m not talking the service-with-a-phoney-forced-rictus in shops, by incompetent ingrown ignorant sales assistants. Sorry, “sales associates” and “make-up artists.” That’s all beyond hope. I’ve been at the happy stage, for some years now, where the following conversation is no longer a fantasy but happens nearly every time:

SA: Can I help you?

G: [... pause... look SA straight in the eye ... raise one--just one--eyebrow ...  turn head to one side ... smile quizzically but sadly ... ]

G: No, I don’t think so.

Sometimes, very rarely, the conversation will continue:

SA: Are you sure?

G: [smile sweetly, perkily, brightly] Oh yes. Quite sure. But thank you ever so much for the kind offer.

Nope. Not that. But the kind of consultancy, research, and analysis I seem to have an unfortunate habit of providing for free over on MUA. If anyone would like to hire my services to do this for actual money, do let me know. In the meantime, I’m happy to do my small bit in the greater cause of BS-busting, gratis et pro bono. For a stellar model of how this is done by the BS-bashing experts, see this section of Ben Goldacre’s “Bad Science” blog’s forum:

“Fun with Pseudoscience. Click here for action, and all the fun of the fair: quackery, scare stories, miracle cures, iffy adverts, passing banter and the great british sport of moron baiting…”

While we’re sort of on the subject, and before I fork off from the tangent so as to return to what I was going to talk about in the first place–see also these two rather splendid and heartening recent pieces, from BS:

• How to read a paper
• Kids who spot bullshit, and the adults who get upset about it

And now, back to The Point. A conversation about hair…

THE LADY OF SHALLOTT (NOT HER REAL NAME, NOR HER MUA-NAME)

I see you are very knowledgable about ing’s & I’ve posted my question on the HB but another set of eyes would help. I’ve been cone free for almost 2 weeks but my conditioner had cones that I wasn’t aware of. I ordered the John Masters cone fragrance free dish & I saw your review ( the only one lol ). I adore the new shampoo even though it has sulfates. I just wanna make sure it is indeed cone free, if you could take a look at the ing’s & let me know if it is cone free, I’d appreciate it. Thanks in advance:
Ingredients
Water/Aqua/Eau, Ammonium Laureth Sulfate, Cocamidopropyl Betaine, Sodium C14-16 Olefin Sulfonate, Sodium Laureth Sulfate, Polyquaternium-47, Lauryl Pyrrolidone, Salvia Officinalis (Sage) Leaf Extract, Urtica Dioica (Nettle) Extract, Chamomilla Recutita (Matricaria) Flower Extract, Humulus Lupulus (Hops) Extract, Rosmarinus Officinalis (Rosemary) Leaf Extract, Melissa Officinalis Leaf Extract, Achillea Millefolium Extract, Prunus Serotina (Wild Cherry) Bark Extract, Cymbopogon Schoenanthus Extract, Calendula Officinalis Flower Extract, Hydroxypropyltrimonium Honey, Sodium Pca, Hydrolyzed Oats, Acetamide Mea, Panthenol, Hydrolyzed Soy Protein, Hyaluronic Acid, Linoleic Acid, Linolenic Acid, Sorbitol, Triticum Vulgare (Wheat) Germ Oil, Simmondsia Chinensis (Jojoba) Seed Oil, Tocopherol, Sulfur, Silk Amino Acids, Cocodimonium Hydroxypropyl Hydrolyzed Keratin, Acrylates/Peg-10 Maleate/Styrene Copolymer, Tetrasodium Edta, Citric Acid, Ethylhexyl Methoxycinnamate, Parfum/Fragrance, Methylchloroisothiazolinone, Methylisothiazolinone, Red 40 (Ci 16035).
I know there might be some ing’s you might not be fond of but I have allergies to many essential oils & scents and this shampoo has worked great so I’m just wondering about cones.

————————

GINGER:

[Ed.--See? Flattery--works every time. Niceness--always works in your favour. Nicely done.]

No silicones, not to worry!
The sulfates in this are, IMHE, fine. The one to really worry about is sodium laurYl sulfate (SLS), but really only if you’re eczematic (*raises hand*); some others, and some combinations, can be stripping on treated hair.
Scents, totally agree, up to you and what your nose and skin can handle–and like! that’s so important too!! [Ed.--sorry, I do sometimes wax a bit naff.]

————————

SHALLOT:

So sorry to message you again but I have another quick question. Is lauryl pyrrolidone a cone? I looked it up & it says a cleansing agent but it took me a year to find a great cone free shampoo & I hope it’s not a cone. Thank you so much

————————

GINGER:

[Ed.--I like this correspondent. She asks good questions, of several sources, and questions her answers. Score another point for the worthy cause of good healthy scepticism.]

Quick answer: no, not a silicone. The sources you found were quite right!

Long answer: the clue’s in the name; not all chemical compounds ending in -one are silicones (actually, very few are)

The most common silicones used cosmetically (skin, hair, makeup) end in
-methicone
-methiconol
-siloxane
-methylsiloxysilicate

Useful lists:
http://forums.longhaircommunity.com/vbjournal.php?do=article&articleid=13

Useful further info:
http://www.naturallycurly.com/curlreading/curl-products/curlchemist-silicone-or-not-whats-in-a-name
http://www.naturallycurly.com/curlreading/curl-products/ingredients-commonly-used-in-hair-care-products-silicones
http://www.naturallycurly.com/curlreading/curl-products/curlchemist-amodimethicone-and-other-amine-functionalized-silicones

See further on chemical naming:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_nomenclature
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IUPAC_nomenclature
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_organic_compounds
(and pretty much any organic chemistry textbook, indeed most high-school chemistry ones and even–depending on place–middle- & high-school science ones).

————————

SHALLOT:
Thank you for all the info!

————————

GINGER:
yvw

————————

SHALLOT:

the shampoo I was using was definitely not for me. I used it for 2 weeks and after about the 5th day of each week I had to clarify, my hair felt odd (if that makes sense). You know a shampoo isnt the right one for you when you feel like you have a new head of hair after clarifying lol. I have a liter of Malibu C Well Water shampoo (Im on well water) and I dont see any cones but would love your input about the formulation – I think you know enough to be able to look at ing’s and know if its quality stuff for the hair. Sorry for always coming to you but honestly, you seem to be one of the few that really knows hair and ing’s. BTW, the scent is very nice (barely there) and we’re both scent sensitive…

Water (Aqua, Eau), Sodium C14-15 Olefin Sulfonate, Cocoamidopropyl Betaine, Cocamide DIPA, Sodium Lauryl Sulfoacetate, Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate, Disodium EDTA, Linum Usitatissium (Linseed) Seed Extract, Hydrolyzed Rice Protein, Panthenol, Ascorbic Acid, Organic Aloe Barbadensis Leaf Juice, Glyceryl Caprylate/Caprate, Citric Acid, Polyquaternium-10, Sodium Gluconate, Glucose, Glycerin, Butylene Glycol, PEG-120 Methyl Glucose Dioleate, Phenoxyethanol, Potassium Sorbate , Fragrance (Parfum), Blue?1 (CI 42090).

I dont see any cones and from the research I was forced to do over the past few months I do see beneficial ing’s, am I correct (did I pass the test)?

[Ed.--Chuckle: there's no test. The only test is life, and it looks like you pass!]

It seems there’s some debate about whether or not the ing’s I sent you contain anything beneficial to the hair. I say yes but as usual another MUA’r is saying no – it has nothing ‘good for the hair’ & this person is also unsure about there being any cones in it so I hope you understand why I turn to you for help

————————

GINGER:

[Ed.--Deep breath. Dive straight in. Feels like this, though:]

Looks OK to me–a straight-forward shampoo; probably won’t be super-moisturising (but that’s what conditioner’s for). Run-down on ingredients:
Water, Aloe Barbadensis Leaf Juice: good stuff; allows formula to be, well, liquid, fluid, for practical purposes.
Sodium C14-15 Olefin Sulfonate, Cocoamidopropyl Betaine, Cocamide DIPA, Sodium Lauryl Sulfoacetate, Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate: detergents (i.e. stuff to clean), mild, fairly standard
Disodium EDTA, Sodium Gluconate: chelating agents, viscosity adjusters, fine. More info, see here:
http://www.ehow.com/facts_5007478_what-disodium-edta.html
Linseed Extract, Hydrolyzed Rice Protein, Panthenol, Glycerin, : moisturisers, conditioning agents
Ascorbic Acid: vitamin C. Won’t do anything for hair, might be good on skin (scalp for ex.), may also be here to lower pH (good: more acidic, closer to skin pH)
Glyceryl Caprylate/Caprate: emulsifiers/emollients, some conditioning
Citric Acid: pH adjuster (acidify), some preservative properties
Polyquaternium-10: reduces static/fly-aways, adds impression of body & shine
Glucose: sugar, hydrophilic humectant, for moisture and fullness (works like HA)
Butylene Glycol: humectant, emollient (for “feel” of shampoo as much as anything)
PEG-120 Methyl Glucose Dioleate: thickener (for “feel” of shampoo)
Phenoxyethanol, Potassium Sorbate: preservatives, bactericides, prevent stuff from going off
Fragrance, Blue?1 (CI 42090): no functional purpose

So: the stuff in your shampoo is inoffensive. Most of the ingredients fall into the following categories, for what they do:
1. make the shampoo feel nice–not too runny, not too thick, not too gummy, etc.
2. clean hair: the detergents
3. adjust the pH to an appropriate lower level
4. act as preservatives

and no, there are no silicones in it: I know you don’t like them so good news

Some of the ingredients are there for moisturising purposes; they’d moisturise skin (including scalp), and certainly add to the moist rich feel of the product, but I’d agree with your other sources that they don’t necessarily do much for *hair*.

However: this isn’t necessarily such a bad thing, given the purposes of shampoo:

1. To clean hair–but also scalp. Without irritating scalp. It’s as important to be skin-compatible as anything else. The stuff I’ve labelled in your formula as moisturising does that for skin.

2. To keep scalp (and its flora) healthy, including stimulating hair growth. Bear in mind that the only part of hair that’s alive is the root: below (and right on) the surface of the skin. Rubbing the scalp does this a little, via increasing blood circulation as much as anything else. Most stimulation for hair growth, though, will be from the inside: what you eat. And–on blood circulation–exercise. So long as the shampoo is fine on your skin, and you massage the scalp, you’ll be ticking this box.

3. The hair shaft will get clean through shampoo running down it, for the most part; it usually doesn’t need any extra work. Sure, a shampoo shouldn’t actively damage hair: hence why washing-up liquid and other stronger household detergents aren’t a good idea. But a shampoo doesn’t need to be overloaded with moisturisers. You’re washing it out! (Same goes for face and body cleansers.)

4. To prepare hair for conditioning.

On conditioning shampoos (initially intended as 2-in-1 combined shampoo+conditioner) and how they work, see: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4559227.html

Quite a lot of “conditioning shampoos” are actually–in formulation–very similar or identical to 2-in-1s; the issue with them is that it’s the silicones that leave a conditioning coating on the hair: great if just doing the one wash (and go), not so good if you try to follow with a conditioner, whose action will be blocked by the coating…

Conditioning is what “is good for” the hair. Hair is, remember, dead; nothing can “feed” it or “make it healthier”–it can only be made to *look* better fed, healthier, plumper, etc.

Shampooing will lift up the cuticles down each hair shaft–they’ll feel a little rough when you rinse the shampoo out. This is normal, and how a properly-formulated shampoo works. At this stage, adding moisturisers c/o conditiioner will slip them in between and on top of cuticles; adding moisture, smoothing them down, filling in “gaps” where there’s breakage, adding fullness, ideally keeping moisture in too. This is why it’s a good idea to keep conditioner on for longer.

Note that breaks, split ends, and other damage can’t be “mended” permanently: they can, however, be patched over–which will reduce the chance of a tear spreading. Think of tights/pantyhose that get a ladder: it’s like applying a blob of clear nail-varnish to stop the rip from continuing all the way up your leg.

Moisturisers that do this: various oils and waxes, synthetic parallels (such as quats), silicones (smoothing down), hydrolyzed protein (note: as opposed to amino acids or proteins–don’t work as well), .

Now: those conditioning agents work on the hair outside. There are a few that have been proven to be beneficial–strengthening, patching over any breaks–on the inside, going to the core of the hair shaft:
coconut oil
olive oil
avocado oil
on these (and other oils, penetrative abilities, etc.) see: http://thebeautybrains.com/2007/05/14/two-natural-oils-that-make-your-hair-shiny-and-strong/
(possibly, data inconclusive) panthenol / provitamin B5

Best two ways to use them, IMO, are:
1. as a pre-wash, like hot oil treatments: massage into scalp and (gently) down length of hair. Some people leave oil on overnight; my hair’s too fine for that, but I find 20 min or so is good, 30-45 great.
2. in your conditioner; and smoothed into hair ends at the end of a wash.

Also: so as to “seal down” cuticles at the end of washing hair, once you’ve conditioned, rinse out with cold water. As cold as you can manage, as long as you can. Seriously, worth the effort (and agony!!!).

More on all this hair business: see The Beauty Brains
how shampoos work: part 1 http://thebeautybrains.com/2006/04/22/how-shampoos-work-part-1/
part 2 http://thebeautybrains.com/2006/04/28/beauty-in-a-bottle-how-do-shampoos-work-part-2-mixing/
part 3 http://thebeautybrains.com/2006/05/05/beauty-in-a-bottle-how-do-shampoos-work-part-3-interaction-with-hair/
on 2-in-1 (that link in last email=the basic formula) http://thebeautybrains.com/2006/06/06/how-do-2-in-1-shampoos-work/
all shampoo posts: http://thebeautybrains.com/?s=shampoo
and similarly (use the site’s search function) on conditioners, and so on…

And see the various hair forums: long hair community, curly hair, etc. Useful–range of opinions and schools of thought.

Hope that’s all useful, sorry for length–but better that than leaving gaps or being unclear!

————————

[Ed.--a quick breath of fresh air and entremets--

For the record, news fresh in (2011-07-30) about The Beauty Brains: Do You Read The Most Influential Beauty And Fashion Blogs?

Also: on oils that actually do diddly squat for conditioning hair: do, O buyers, beware of the con that goes beyond the Emperor's New Clothes: plain oil masquerading as plain-oil-with-a-fancy-name.

Case in point: L'Oréal Professionnel Mythic Oil (c/o Beaut.ie). €15.20 / 125 ml. "Enriched with"--i.e. contains, but not the only ingredients, nor indeed the main ones--avocado and grapeseed oils. Neither of which is "precious," both being pretty cheap oils, readily available from shops. Only the former demonstrably does anything, and neither is mythic (olive oil, for the record, is mythic).

See also: Kérastase Elixir Ultime (c/o MakeupAndBeautyBlog.com), a.k.a. "ultimate highway robbery" ($50.00 / 125 ml). ]

————————

SHALLOT:

You’re great! That was like a crash course in shampoo & it really helped! Much appreciation for all the info & time you put into your reply. I have fine hair too & only use dish from the ears down or my scalp gets irritated no matter what I use & my hair is weighed down. Right now I’m using Vo5 conditioner, one that’s cone free & waiting for the John Masters fragrance free to come. Again, many thanks for sharing such insightful knowledge – I can’t thank you enough

————————

GINGER:

[Ed.--mmmm, this is the part I like, like being a cat and getting my tummy rubbed...Also: too bloody right. Damn fool me. All that writing is not, I stress not, just going into archived mail. Dammit. Also, I'm not great. Don't praise my knowledge: this is simply research skills; which I do ridiculously fast. Damn, cat let out of bag. Now everyone knows. Also, too many cats in mixed metaphors now. There will be metaphorical-cat-fights. Maybe even more serious cat-related problems, e.g. Schroedinger's Cat (on which, see also the very good eponymous Robert Anton Wilson fictions). Ulp, anyway.]

hey, you’re welcome! I’ll be sticking a lot of that hair stuff on my blog too (I end up doing that sort of thing quite a bit, to-ing and fro-ing between that and MUA…)
best wishes for happy hair

————————

SHALLOT:

I’m really on a mission to find a great leave in that’s cone free, not for styling just to add some of the good stuff hair needs but finding one that doesn’t have a strong scent & is free of the things I’m allergic to is tough. [...] Forgot to ask: how do you feel about Vo5 conditioner (the cone free ones)? I’m curious to know your thoughts. It’s literally the only dish I can use without any weight, getting too much protein/moisture, and it rinses out clean. But so many ppl are stuck on Kerastase, Je Veux, etc. and here I am happy as can be with a dollar conditioner lol.

————————

GINGER:

VO5 looks fine–and it’s cruelty-free, unlike Kérastase! I can’t handle the scent, that’s all. Their hot oil range is also really good. [...]

Cone-free fragrance-free leave-in: the JMO Bare conditioner would do it. The formula’s identical to their Citrus & Neroli Detangler, but minus the scent. The C&N is both a rinse-out and a leave-in. Therefore you can use the Bare for both purposes too.

The back of the Bare bottle, by the way, has a mistake: the instructions for use are the same as the ones on the shampoo. I contacted JMO to tell them; they’ll be changing them when they’ve used up all the current stock of plastic containers and are ordering the next lot to be made…

Lots of other conditioners work fine as leave-ins; some need to be watered down a little. Most leave-ins are just a marketing ploy to get you to buy more stuff; and in a more convenient bottle. You can make up your own-whether you prefer a squeeze or pump or spray bottle–just mix conditioner and water (use distilled) to the right texture. Can also add aloe vera and whatever else; and shake well before use.

Another one that’s good (but pricey): Phyto 7 and their 9.

————————

SHALLOT:

I found this suggestion on the LHC board & of course wanted your opinion. All I really need to confirm is it’s cone free (there might be some hidden cones) and overall how it looks. Fingers crossed on this one. And I promise not to message you with every shampoo question I have lol but this is a huge surprise!

Water (Aqua), Sodium Laureth Sulfate, Cocamide MEA, Ammonium Chloride, Fragrance (Parfum), Hydroxypropyl Methylcellulose, Tetrasodium EDTA, DMDM Hydantoin, Citric Acid, Propylene Glycol, Polysorbate 20, Tocopheryl Acetate [Vitamin E Acetate], Mangifera Indica (Mango) Fruit Extract, Citrus Nobilis (Mandarin Orange) Peel Oil, Methylchloroisothiazolinone, Methylisothiazolinone, PPG-9, Aloe Barbadensis Leaf Extract [Aloe Vera], Yellow 5 (CI 19140), Red 33 (CI 17200)

————————

GINGER:

Yes, cone-free.
The fragrance and orange (peel) oil could be potential irritants–no guarantees either way, YMMV, etc.; but if you’ve been irritated by fragrance in the past, worth looking out for.

Hope that helps!

————————

SHALLOT:

I’ve examined these ing’s for hours and I’d appreciate your input. First, are there any cones & are these ing’s beneficial for scalp & hair? I never thought coffee extract helped stimulate hair growth! It’s a shampoo by Natures Gate & I’m loving what I see but really need a pair of ‘expert eyes’.

Water, Sodium Laureth Sulfate, Cocamide DEA, Cocamidopropyl Betaine, Biotin, Hordeum Distichon (Barley) Extract, Panthenol, Cystein, Cystine Bis-Pg-Propyl Silanetriol, Wheat Amino Acids,Soy Amino Acids, Arginine, Serine, Threonine, lnositol, Folic Acid, Simmondsia, Chinensis (Jajaba) Seed Oil, Geranium Maculatum Extract, Coffea Arabica (Coffee) Seed Extract, Viola Tricolor (pansy) Extract, Sodium Riboflavin Phosphate, Glycerin, Aloe Barbadensis (Aloe Vera) Leaf Juice, Niacin, Butylene Glycol, Citric Acid, Sodium Chloride, Glyceryl undecylenate, Phenoxyethanol, Fragrance.

————————

GINGER:

[Ed.--Famous last words re. "I promise not to message you with every shampoo question I have lol." Attention-span of a gnat. "xpert eyes"--flattery and cajoling again. But hey... here we go again... good question, and it's always good to encourage questions and questioning; and the information will be publicized further afield anyway, so it might prove to the greater good of a greater number... ]

Hi there–

1. No ‘cones.

2. Coffee and hair growth: never having thought it aside–I *know* of no evidence for this statement. Sounds to me like someone thought “it’s a stimulant: so it must stimulate hair growth too.” Which is factually false, and false reasoning 101 fail.
But, do your own research (by which I mean reputable sources and science journal articles…), who knows. Caffeine has benefits on skin: more on this on SCB and in reviews and so on.

2. Ingredient functions:
water, aloe vera, butylene glycol, sodium chloride: the base to the formula, to give the right texture; but. glyc. also a humectant
the first bunch are cleansers/detergents
the next bunch (from biotin to folic acid), plus riboflavin and niacin: amino acids, vitamin, pro-vitamins.Helps to mosturise hair and skin; (see links in earlier message) hydrolyzed proteins are more usable/penetrate hair better than amino acids or straight-up proteins, but the latter still do a decent job.
3. jojoba oil, glycerin, glyceryl undecylenate: moisturise (skin and, to some extent, hair shaft)
4. geranium, fragrance: scent
5. pansy: NG claim it’s to protect against environmental damage. I’d not take their word for it, but go off and research it and see… Wikipedia is always a start. Some way down the “pansy” page, there’s a lovely story “explaining” why pansies have no scent. Looks like it’s used in phytotherapy/naturopathy/herbal remedies, but on skin: nothing for use on hair. Looks like at the very worst it’s harmless (and there in very small dose anyway).
6. coffee: may have skin benefits (though this far down the ing. list, I have doubts)
7. citric acid: lower the pH to a skin- and hair-friendly moderately acidic level
8. phenoxyethanol: preservative

Hope that helps. That’s the NG Jojoba shampoo, right? I’ve found Nature’s Gate shampoos to be generally decent and reliable–I’ve liked that one, also the Herbal, Hemp, Aloe Vera, and Chamomile. The Biotin and Pomegranate Sunflower ones look decent too; not tried, using up my Avalon Organics and stuck alas with unscented for the time being! I found some of them can be a bit drying, so I’d recommend the ones that says they’re more moisturising (indeed, even, for damaged, coloured, messed-up, abused etc. hair), and look in the ing. list for more oils, as near the start of the list as possible. The other main difference from one to another is scent: try before you buy. Unashamedly!

Another good place to look for guidance: reviews on bigger websites that sell the stuff. I usually look at the ones on drugstore.com, well.ca, iherb.com, luckyvitamin.com, vitacost.com

————————

SHALLOT:

You know I’m cone free & have a great shampoo but having a tough time finding a good dish. I’m using Vo5 tea therapy blackberry sage dish but oddly enough it’s kinda drying & after a few uses I feel like I need to clarify. I had a reaction to the JM fragrance free one. I’m hoping for a drugstore dish similar to Vo5 but with better results. That scent doesn’t linger & is inoffensive. I’ve tried Nexxus & Biolage but not for me. Suave sucks. Any ideas come to mind? Maybe a different Vo5 dish but which one?
Thanks for all your help!

————————

GINGER:

[Ed.--Bless you, I do remember. Then again, I may be a redhead but I'm not a goldfish.]

Suggest:
Avalon Organics grapeseed & olive (orange label)
Desert Essence (turquoise bottle)
Earth Science (lavender-periwinkle label)
(both are unscented)

Others worth a look-smell:
Avalon Organics Biotin and others
Burt’s Bees green tea & fennel. Yes, it says it’s for coloured hair; can be used on untreated too.
Desert Essence (various)
Earth Science, the citrus one (yellow-amber label)
EO (various)
Hugo (various)
Jason (various)
Lavera Basis or Rose
Nature’s Gate (various)
ShiKai (various)
(all at Whole Foods and similar; I’d recommend going to the store, reading labels, sniffing things, eventually buying a couple to try out at home; that’s how I do my research anyway… aside from MUA reviews. Check out Trader Joe’s as well; I haven’t been in years, as we don’t have it in Vancouver, but their own-brand stuff seems to be worth investigating.)

Possibly also, drugstore in North America:
Naked Naturals
Tresemme (if you can stand the scent–that’s my issue with their stuff)
Yes to (Carrots etc.)

See also, for more: http://www.makeupalley.com/m_127830344

Hope that helps; afraid it’s still a matter of testing stuff out on yourself and your hair…

————————

SHALLOT:

I’ve googled it & found no info. It’s in a shampoo I want to try & it’s high up on the list. I’m wondering if it’s water soluble and if not, how much would it coat? trimethylsiloxamodimethicone

Heres the full list so it might help in determining it’s function: water, ammonium cocoyl isetmiohionate, cocamidapropyl betaine, sodium lauroamphoacetate, cocamidopropyl hydroxysultaine, decyl glucoside, glycol distearate, sodium methyl cocoyl taurate, polyquaternium-10, polyquaternium-7, cocodimonium hydroxypropyl silk amino acids, trimethylsiloxamodimethicone, thermus thermophylus ferment, enteromorpha compressa extract, himanthalia elongata extract (sea silk), hypnea musciformis extract, gellidiela ascerosa extract, sasrgassum filipendula extract, ascophyllum nodosum extract, chondrus crispus (carrageenan) extract, macrocystis pyriffera extract, palmaria palmata extract, neptune kelp extract, undaria pinnatifida extract,pelvita canaliculata extract, laminaria digitalia, hydrolyzed rhodophycea extract, cinnamidopropyltrimonium chloride, hydrolyzed vegetable protein pg-propyl silanetriol, ppg-5 ceteth-10 phosphate, polyquaternium-7, c11-15 pareth-7, c12-16 pareth-9, helianthus annuus (sunflower) seed extract, glycerin, trideceth-12, phenoxyethanol, caprylyl glycol, sorbic acid, tetrasodium edta, butylene glycol, citric acid, fragrance (parfum).

Any help is appreciated

————————

GINGER:

sorry–am at work–suggest further research, ask on hair board? also, off MUA, check the beauty brains forum, the various long hari etc. fora too?
G xox

————————

AND THEY ALL LIVED HAPPILY EVER AFTER.
THEIR HAIR TOO, TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE.
THE END.

Mmmm, future potential: the harmonious joys of ginger and shallot, when combined in classic Thai style with lemon, coconut, chili, and dry shrimp

For the record:

• I was at work (hence fast typing and heinous typo/Freudian slip)
• “trimethylsiloxamodimethicone” [sic.] isn’t water-soluble
• “I’ve googled it & found no info”? WTF?? WWJD???

Being at least part-human (depending on your chosen version of events / reading), he’d do this:

Ah–I see. OK, let’s try again with the suggested orthographic change:

Even from just the first page of results–without going through all 384, let alone actually opening and reading each result–you can already kinda see where the whole water soluble/insoluble thing is going. Let’s look a little more closely at those search results:

See the third result there? That’s the MF data sheet on our good old trimethylsiloxyamodimethicone. From that data sheet, a.k.a. The Horse’s Mouth, we have this:

From p. 2 (screenshot):

QED: Solubility in water = not

But: you’ll recall that earlier business,

it is easily re-emulsified and thus easily washed out

Suggestion, to all and sundry: try using shampoo, not just water.

Note: that will be incompatible with the COM. That is: conditioner-only method: using only conditioner, no shampoo; both washing and moisturising hair with conditioner. And, if giving hair a quick wash, just soaking it and conditioning. It’s not necessarily as daft as it sounds: rather like washing skin with emollient cream, or indeed many cream cleansers. And the COM does have a substantial body of evidence behind it (see: various curly hair fora online) for certain hair types.

As ever, guys and gals, the moral of the story can be summed up succinctly:

YMMV + γνῶθι σεαυτόν

Image at top: Bad Science (Ben Goldacre’s primary blog)

I love these women:

ffffound.com

ffffound.com

adore-vintage.blogspot.com

missmoss.co.za

This is how I want to read with my Mister from now on…

ffffound.com

And this is how I would like to spend my first few weeks in Austin:

norulesnoshame.wordpress.com

]]> http://amillionmilesfromnormal.com/2011/06/29/mid-year-bah-humbug/ Wed, 29 Jun 2011 04:03:00 +0000 amillionmilesfromnormal http://amillionmilesfromnormal.com/2011/06/29/mid-year-bah-humbug/ http://quranistvoices.wordpress.com/2011/06/26/in-a-nutshell-how-to-read-the-quran/ Sun, 26 Jun 2011 11:51:35 +0000 Farouk A. Peru http://quranistvoices.wordpress.com/2011/06/26/in-a-nutshell-how-to-read-the-quran/ Renae asked today in QRAC. I’m actually writing a book on that subject (pish tosh! its been forthcoming for 10 bloody years!) but fortunately, Rizwan Sherazi nailed it with his answer:

‎3:7, 39:23, 16:101-106, 19:16-18, 4:82… this just to start…. honestly if you watch mohammad shaikhs lectures he covers all of thi stuff in excellent detail in the one on Quran and the one on Languages

recommended link How to Read and Study Quran

One of the blogs I follow is Robert Bruce’s 101 Books blog, in which Bruce chronicles his adventures reading through Time’s Top 100 books since 1923 (Ulysses is the 101st.). I really love Bruce’s enthusiasm, his writing style, and hearing what he thinks about what he reads. I’ve read some of his other reviews (like this most recent one) and I always appreciate his insights. I’ve been disappointed, however, recently by his attitude towards reading Are You There, God? It’s Me, Margaret. I can understand a middle-aged man’s reluctance to read this book, and I appreciate his transparency about his discomfort. But between his own concerns and the mocking of his commenters (not that he or any other blogger is responsible for what commenters say, but still–), it’s starting to seem a little sexist. First, people wonder what on earth Blume’s novel is doing on Time’s Top 100 list to begin with– because it’s YA? Because it’s about a girl? Because it’s somehow less literary than Deliverance (another recent read)?  My readers know that I think YA is an important genre , and plenty literary. As for the ookiness a man might feel reading about a girl’s coming of age– just think of all the male bildungsroman women have read and continue to read (including the very first book on Bruce’s list), and suck it up. If we only read novels about people like us, there will be precious little reading material available.

I’m bringing this up because I think people approach Jane Eyre with a similar prejudice. Because it’s about a girl, and I, hypothetical reader, am not a girl. Because she gets married at the end, it must be a romance, and I hate romances, because I, hypothetical reader, am too tough/too male/too practical. Because it was published in 1847 in England, and I, hypothetical reader, was born in the 20th Century, in a place other than England. Not me = not worth reading. Seriously?

Jane Eyre is, to me, essentially a novel about freedom, independence, and self-actualization. That has nothing to do with you, hypothetical reader? At one point, Jane extemporizes to her reader, “I desired liberty; for liberty I gasped; for liberty I uttered a prayer.” The novel begins with (and, perhaps, belabors) repeated attempts for others to oppress Jane. Her Aunt, cousins, and servants (except maybe Bessie) at Gateshead, followed by the odious Brocklehurst at Lowood, then later by another cousin who proposes marriage — all these people try to tell her that she is wicked, useless, and somehow inherently of less value than they are. Jane’s rebellious character gains some humility before God while at school, but her increasing knowledge further strengthens her own inner sense of right and wrong. She remains true to her own standards of right wrong and in so doing eventually finds the true freedom she sought for so long. This freedom is not merely servitude, though Bronte is Christian enough to marry service to freedom, but genuine independence.

I can understand readers finding this a difficult read. The language is awkward, especially to readers in the Twitter age. It takes some getting used to. And Jane is so entirely herself that sometimes readers might find it hard to sympathize with her. In fact, we can still be friends even if you don’t like Jane Eyre. But before one claims to have “a perfect and encompassing grasp of how long and awful it is, from cover to cover,” (koff koff - Matt! - koff koff), one might want to have a reason for disliking it that is greater than the powerful and necessary message Bronte presents about freedom, equality, and individual worth. In an earlier post, I defended a book based on its thematic value, and a commenter pointed out that perhaps people hadn’t noticed that theme – or any theme at all. As a self-proclaimed charitable reader, I generally try to see the value in what a book is rather than focus on what a book isn’t. Shannon Hale has said some really interesting things about how books rarely fail us, but our expectations of books sometimes do. I think readers of Jane Eyre (or Are You There, God? It’s Me, Margaret.) – or any other book– would get a lot more joy from reading if they’d look for what’s good in a book rather than what’s wrong with it (which is why I try not to write negative reviews). Let’s just pretend we are all sophisticated readers engaging in the pursuit of truth about the human experience and move beyond mere initial preference (or lack thereof).

We’re reading this book for my church book club. I’ll probably have more to say after talking it over with The Ladies.

A Book Review

I picked this book up because first, it was written by one of the most brilliant and humanistic writer/person I know, and second, because my hometown was destroyed by Kilauea Volcano when I was 18 and I was curious to see if there would be any similarities between Pompeii and Herculaneum and a simple plantation village in Hawaii called Kapoho.

Pellegrino took me not only to the sites of destruction by Mt. Vesuvius but to the Titanic and to the Twin Towers on 9/11, with side trips to Hiroshima. He took my hand and pointed out the incredible similarities in the sciences of how things happen and the strange connections among these sites of destruction. He hid nothing, exposing the weaknesses and strengths of humanity and as a bonus, into his own awesome personal journey . He took me on a time machine, to Mt. Vesuvius in A.D. 79, down to the Titanic in 1912 , to the Twin Towers in 2002, and to Hiroshima in 1945 and dropped me off in Kapoho.

Not being of the scientific mind, (I turn to the comics first on Sunday mornings and prefer to think magic takes care of the unknown), I didn’t expect such a fascinating trip. I wept, laughed, gasped and froze in awe, as I read each word of this genius of a storyteller. The most astonishing thing was, I understood what I was reading. I was stunned at the similarity in human behavior in people of my village to the Romans in A.D. 79, to passengers on the Titanic and the unforgettable people of 9/11.

Aw, come on, you’re probably thinking, how can a little village be compared to such historical events and sites? Because when your own village is destroyed by lava and earthquakes, it is as significant.

I stood in front of my freshman speech class in college during the Kapoho eruption and blasted the students who spoke of the beauty of the eruption while my village was being destroyed. For the rest of the semester, a stranger paid for my snacks and coffee at the coffee shop.

I wrote a paper for my Sociology class about the sudden physical strength of people who could lift stalled cars to help clear the road in the evacuation. I wrote a paper for my English class titled, “In the Base There is Good,” honoring one villager who was labeled the bad egg, and potential criminal of the village. He was the last to evacuate because he remained to help others load their household furniture into trucks.

I created a unit of study for the Hawaii State Public School System Literature Program, on Madame Pele, the Goddess of Fire who is believed to live in one of the craters. My father, out of respect for Madame Pele, accepted the erroneous radio announcement that our house was covered by lava by saying, “IF Pele wants my house, she can have it.” This was preceded by his total denial that it was our house.

My grandmother was the first to lose her house, and stories spread that it was punishment because she must have refused Goddess Pele some fruits from her yard. Why else would her house be the first in the path of the lava flow? The belief in Goddess Pele was stronger than any feelings of sympathy and empathy. The Japanese called it “bachi.”

Goddess Pele was believed to take many forms; often as a white dog or an old woman. Myths, acts of denial and bravery and even strange happenings that can’t be explained through scientific data, were common threads among all of us from Pompeii to Kapoho. We had different names in Kapoho because of our Hawaiian beliefs like Pele’s tears (threads of glass) that also fell on the Roman cities.The howling of dogs in Kapoho were the first signals for disaster just as the cats disappeared from the Titanic.

So how do I draw you into this book? I can’t, except to say, you must experience this yourself, just as I can’t do justice to the first yellow burst of that daffodil in our front yard right now after weeks of heavy fog and rain, by telling you it’s beautiful.

If this book doesn’t humanize you, nothing will.

Ghosts of Mt. Vesuvius DVD and book are also available on the History Channel. I’ve ear-marked over 35 pages because they gave me pause over the author’s story-telling skills, the humor, the language, the poetry, the humanity, the scientific content and people stories. I hope to discuss these pages with you someday which includes author’s own art.

On a personal note, after certain chapters, I returned to my own writing and rewrote or I would like to say, improved my own writing craft. It’s this kind of a book.

I feel way smarter now, too. Come talk story with me after you read this book.

The following comments came in from Red Slider:

Wir lebten nach dem Realismus, nach dem schon experimentierfreudigen Naturalismus und auch nach der expressionistischen Vielfalt bis in die Welt des Dadaismus und Surrealismus, wo alles durchexerziert worden war, was in der Dichtung denkbar und undenkbar war. Jeder Mensch ist sein eigener Fußball – so hatte Tristan Tzara gedichtet, doch vor Jahrzehnten. Und solche Poesie fabrizierten  die Gauner in Bastei im Vorbeigehen – einfach so, aus Freude an der absurden Aussage. Doch war das schon Dichtung?

Die Welt der Kunst hatte bereits die Grenzen der Ästhetik ausgelotet bis hin zur Ästhetik des Schrecklichen. Alles war legitim, alles war künstlerisch erlaubt! Doch wonach verlangte die Jetztzeit?

Worin bestand die Aufgabe eines Dichters, eines Schriftstellers in einem totalitären System?

Bestimmt nicht in der Lobpreisung der sozialistischen Gesellschaft nach proletkultistischer Machart!

Auch nicht in Brecht-Exegese. Bert Brecht in Ehren – er hatte zwar ein umfassendes Werk geschaffen und war aus dem 20. Jahrhundert nicht mehr weg zu denken, doch er war nicht das Alpha und Omega der Literatur, wie man es an der Temeschburger Universität annahm.

Brechts Werk lehnte ich damals aus ideologischen Gründen ab – noch bevor ich es ausreichend studiert hatte. Und dies, obwohl mir Brechts Ideale nicht fremd waren, ganz nach dem Muster, wie andere Literaten Nietzsche ablehnten, a priori und aus einem Vorurteil heraus. Seine Lyrik überzeugte mich deutlich weniger als seine Dramen: zwar wirkte er witzig, doch nicht immer originell; und er reimte wie ein spät geborener Epigone, der sich dazu berufen glaubt, biedere Wahrheiten in Verform verkünden zu müssen. Schon in der Schulbank, wo wir mit sozialistischen Weisheiten traktiert wurden, setzte sich dieser Eindruck fest und blieb konstant, trotz Mackie Messer, Galilei und Shen Te!

Menschen schützt der Wissenschaft Licht, nutzt es und missbraucht es nicht, dass nicht ein Feuerstrahl, einst vernichte uns all – das klang bereits in meinen Kinderohren wie das Eiapopeia vom Himmel, über das bereits Heine spottete.

Doch an der jungen Temeschburger Universität, die mit ihren drei Germanistik-Dozenten nicht allzu viel zu melden hatte, war Brecht Baal, der Abgott und das Absolute, weil es wohl keine rechte Alternativen zu seinem Werk gab oder geben durfte?

Bourgeoise Literatur war nach wie vor verpönt und als dekadent verschrien. Um alles Bürgerliche machten sie einen großen Bogen, um Thomas Mann, um Robert Musil, um Döblin, selbst Kafka war kein Thema…Wer sprach von Rilke, von Georg Trakl oder Gottfried Benn? Niemand!

Und worin bestand das Rezept, selbst Kunst zu fabrizieren? Im schnellen lyrischen Erguss? In einigen subjektiven Assoziationen, die man in Sekunden aufs Papier brachte, die Tiefsinnigkeit suggerierten, obwohl sie nur unnachvollziehbar verworren waren, enigmatisch hermetisch, in Berufung auf das ewig eine Vorbild!

Celan, der andere Name neben Brecht, auf den sich alle beriefen, die dichteten, so als ob sie einen paradigmatischen Schlüssel gefunden hätten. Paul Celan, der die Poesie vom Gehalt lösen wollte, sollte und musste für alles herhalten. Celan, der Dichter aus Tschernowitz, war nach seinem tragischen Ende in der Seine bereits zum Mythos geworden und zur modischen Erscheinung.

Nur war Celan kaum nachzuahmen, und nur schlecht zu kopieren, weil er sehr individuell war im Empfinden wie im lyrischen Ausdruck. Trotzdem wollten sich viele seine, ihm eigene Hermetik, die einer Hermeneutik bedarf, zu eigen zu machen nach dem Ansatz, nichts sei einfacher, als hermetische Aussagen zu konstruieren. Doch wozu?

Wozu dem dreifachen Hermes bewusst huldigen, wenn das Ganze doch nicht hermeneutisch zu vermitteln war? Wozu ein Paradoxon forcieren, wenn es sich selbst aufhebt?

Wozu Holzwege?

Sackgassen ohne Kehre?

Denkblockaden? Celan hatte mit Caraion kommuniziert und mit Heidegger, der von der japanischen Hermetik ausgeht?

Weshalb knüpfte man nur an einem an? Und weshalb nicht in der Offenheit der Lichtung, sondern gerade dort wo es am dunkelsten war.

Kein Ding sei wo das wort gebricht,

besagt ein Trakl-Vers. Heidegger hat ihn kommentiert.

Doch was machten die Verwalter der Sprache daraus, die Dichter? Sie verbauten das Licht im Paradoxon und beraubten sich damit einer möglichen Rezeption. Mit mir standen auch andere Leser vor einem Rätsel in einer Welt, die nach Antworten Ausschau hielt – oder zumindest nach einem Fingerzeig, nach einer Richtung. Wozu erneut Absurdität erzeugen nach Camus, nach Beckett und Ionesco?

Also suchte ich nach anderen Wegen, und zwar jenseits der Hermetik; ich suchte nach der

littérature engagée,

nach dem Werk einer totalen Freiheit, die sich an vollkommene Freiheiten wendet und so auf ihre Weise, als freies Produkt einer schöpferischen Aktivität, die Totalität der menschlichen Situation manifestiert – so schön und vollständig hatte es Sartre vorformuliert!

Ein Francois Villon unserer Tage wäre mir lieber gewesen als ein spätexpressionistischer Melancholiker, der in endogener Depression zerfließt. Doch ich hörte nur – in alberner Nachäffung bundesrepublikanischer Stimmungen – Ho-Ho-Ho-Chi-Minh – Lyrik.

Jene Gruppe, die ihre Einflusswelt verändern wollte, die sich gar – von außen dazu apostrophiert – Aktionsgruppe nannte, brachte zwar etwas ungewohnte und gewöhnungsbedürftige Lyrik hervor, doch dafür kaum etwas, was als gezielte politisch-gesellschaftliche Aktion zu werten gewesen wäre.

Wo blieb der Klartext, den sie bei Biermann bewunderte und den man so gerne reden wollte?

Nur William Totok muckte auf – mit einigen Gedichten, die politische Botschaften enthielten, und wurde dafür in den Kerker geworfen. Neben ihm vielleicht noch Anton Sterbling, der mehr Realitätsbezug forderte, und – fern von der Gruppe Rolf Bossert und Werner Söllner, deren Lyrik zwar poetologisch fundiert, aber schwer entschlüsselbar war.

Die anderen Dichter beschränkten sich auf Ambiguitäten und Metaphern, die nicht zum Verhängnis werden konnten.

Host Samson spricht in diesem Zusammenhang vom Schwert der Selbstzensur in den Köpfen. Der vorauseilende Gehorsam über die Selbstzensur war das beste Mittel, sich dem Zugriff der Securitate zu entziehen.

Selbstzensur bedeute Selbstschutz. Überleben. Doch was wurde dabei aus der Kunst?

Die gerade Linie in der Dichtung implizierte Dissidenz. Nur einige der Dichter wollten keine Dissidenten sein  – Richard Wagner etwa und wohl auch Herta Müller?

Die Zeit des anbrechenden Sozialismus mit den vielen Mängeln in allen Bereichen der Gesellschaft auf dem Weg zur Schaffung des neuen Menschen aber verlangte nach einem Zola, nach einem, der bereit war, das J’ accuse in die Welt zu schreien, nach einem poetischen Ankläger, der Missstände anprangerte, der selbst das politische System angriff und aufstand, um dem Anstand zum Durchbruch zu verhelfen und dem Gewissen! Waren paar freie Rhythmen der angemessene Weg dazu?

Das bezweifelte ich und entschied mich für andere Ausdrucksformen, für den Aphorismus und die prägnante Idee als Sentenz und Maxime, für die differenzierte Erörterung im literarischen und wissenschaftlichen Essay, und die Humoreske und Satire in Fabel und Parabel – und somit für das Amüsement und das heitere Auflachen gemäß dem alten Diktum fabula docet et delectat; und schließlich wählte ich den historischen, existentiell definierten Zeitroman als Sammelstelle für Ideen aller Art und als formales und poetologisches Experimentierfeld.

Mir lag der Aphorismus sehr, weil er an Menschen appelliert, die das Denken bereits beherrschen; die mit den Erkenntnissen jener dreitausend Jahre, von denen Goethe spricht, vertraut sind, weil sie die Basiswerke der Philosophie und Geistesgeschichte nicht nur gelesen, sondern verinnerlicht haben.

Seinerzeit entstanden mehrere Sammlungen von Aphorismen, Maximen und Sentenzen, die ich zum Teil in Fabeln einbaute und in mein Romanfragment, freilich nicht ohne zu merken, dass das Neue rar ist und die notwendige Reife der Bewusstwerdung erst mit dem Leben kommt.

Die Zeit und die spezifischen Umstände ließen es nicht zu, etwas davon veröffentlichen – eben weil mich die Dissidenz, die andere aus unterschiedlichen Gründen vermieden, ganz einnahm. Andere pflegten weiter den subjektiven Erguss, der vom Ich ausging und im Ich endete. Der Mitmensch, der anders fühlte, hatte nicht viel davon.

Doch die so genannten freien Formen der Lyrik waren dabei noch das Mindeste, was mir als Leser, weniger als Kritiker, gegen den Strich ging. Noch widerborstiger wirkten die zahlreichen, fast unzugänglichen Formen von Kurzprosa, mit denen ich in allen literarischen Ecken konfrontiert wurde.

In den Niederungen von Herta Müller findet man den makabren Stil wieder. Die Auflösung herkömmlicher Sprach- und Erzählstrukturen kannte ich aus dem Werk von Joyce und aus dem modernen Roman, dessen Form auch in meinem Umfeld praktiziert wurde. Doch in den Kurzgeschichten der angehenden Schriftsteller und Germanisten stieß ich auf die Auflösung jedes Systems und jeder Struktur bis zum Wegfall der Logik.

Kein Wunder, dass bei soviel Verzicht mit der vornehmen Sprache auch die Moral unter den Tisch fiel. Oft vermisste ich die nachvollziehbare Aussage. Ob luzid; ob verschlüsselt: Der klare Aussagesatz stand neben der logisch unsinnigen und irrealen. Welche galt nun? Welcher hatte Priorität?

Neben dem nicht vorgefundenen Gehalt machten mir Fragen des Stils, der Form und der Sprachverhunzung zu schaffen, die bei Hugo von Hofmannsthal Albträume ausgelöst hätten, die ich in den wenigen neuen Kreationen, die mit offiziellem Plazet überhaupt ediert wurden, vorfand. Oft war es weder ein erkennbarer Stil, noch eine strenge Form, noch eine genuine Sprache, sondern ein wirres Konglomerat aus zufälligen Elementen, die niemand auseinander halten konnte; ein Experiment, das die Literaturgeschichte verhöhnte, das sich selbst überlassen blieb und an der Rezeption vorbei in die Welt gesetzt worden war – vielleicht mit der sadistischen Absicht, den Leser zu quälen.

Was erwartete ich seinerzeit von der Literatur? Und was jetzt, 25 Jahre danach? Eine ganze Menge!

Geistige Potenz! Substanz!

Wie ich sie seit der Vorsokratik über die antiken Dichter bis hin zu Gottfried Benn kannte. Konstruktive Auseinandersetzung mit dem Geist der Zeiten und mit der Realität der Zeit. Natürlich keine Reportage über die wertvollen Anleitungen des Conducătors bei der Aufzucht von Ferkeln, auch keinen Bericht über den Arbeitsbesuch des Führers in einem der zahlreichen Industrieunternehmen des Landes und seinen wertvollen Ausführungen über den Ausbau der multilateral entwickelten Gesellschaft.

Darüber schrieben Berwanger und sein Team. Im Gegensatz dazu erwartete ich realitätsbezogene Literatur, die sich der Gegenwart und der Geschichte kritisch stellt. Nur wer der Realität nicht standhält, flieht sie – flieht in die Romantik, flieht in die Fiktion – doch nicht endgültig in die Arme von Hermes.

Literatur muss nachvollziehbar bleiben. Sie ist keine Gaukelei, kein Zeitvertreib für gelangweilte Menschen im Sozialismus oder anderswo. Sie hat eine eindeutige Funktion, gerade in einer Zeit, wo die Geistlosigkeit offizielles Programm ist; wo der Schwachsinn regiert, gepaart mit der Niedertracht und der Verwerflichkeit. Selbst gute Fiktion hätte ich akzeptiert. Doch ich fand nur subjektive Verschleierungen, deren Symbolik intransparent blieb und deren Metaphern sich im Kreise drehten.

Große Literatur ist einfach Sprache, die bis zur Grenze des Möglichen mit Sinn geladen ist,

schreibt Ezra Pound in How to Read.

Aus seiner Sicht existierte die Literatur nicht im luftleeren Raum. Dem Schriftsteller kommt ein soziale Funktion zu und die Aufgabe, die Sprache eines Volkes so zu fördern, dass sie vor der Verkümmerung bewahrt wird. Gerade bei der Verschleierung der Gedanken mittels Sprache verfällt auch diese. Was sollte ich dazu noch hinzufügen. Ich, ein nicht nur weltanschaulich, sondern auch literarisch Konservativer, mit festen ästhetischen Kriterien und literaturhistorisch verifizierbaren Ansätzen, suchte immer noch nach Ideen, nach Werten, nach Greifbarem? Selbst der vor oft zu Unrecht gemiedene Brecht hatte die Klarheit nicht aufgegeben! Er hatte ihr sogar das Poetische untergeordnet, wenn es darum ging, klar engagierte Botschaften zu vermitteln.

Wie rückständig und antiquiert! Damals suchte ich nicht nach dem Weg des geringsten Widerstands, der schnell produzierten Literatur ohne Anfang und ohne Ende, ohne Sinn und Substanz, sondern nach literarischer Arbeit, nach neuen Erkenntnissen in der Auseinandersetzung mit Wissen; also suchte ich nach philosophischen Substanz, nach Ideen, die originell waren, die in produktiver Auseinandersetzung entstanden waren, kurz nach neuem geistigen Gehalt, der Lösungsansätze für die Zeit, in der wir lebten, erkennen ließ.

Ferner suchte nach einem genialen Aphorismus, der das Denken in Essenzen erfasst, nach dem gebildeten Essay – wie ihn im Deutschen nach Schopenhauer und Nietzsche Thomas Mann, Hugo von Hofmannsthal und unzählige andere Literaten pflegten; und ich suchte nach dem großen Gedicht, aus dem sich eine Welt erschließt; nach dem tiefen Roman, in welchem Philosophie, Geschichte und gesellschaftliche Phänomene der Jetztzeit zusammenfließen und ein künstlerisches Ganzes ergeben, das für jedermann nachvollziehbar ist.

Tiefer gehend suchte ich nach reflektierter Musik und musikalischer Reflexion? Und was fand ich vor?

Ganze Berge konventioneller Literatur, die so sehr der offiziellen Linie entsprach, dass sich die Lektüre schon nicht mehr lohnte, dass einem das Lesen verödet wurde. Die Akteure waren bekannt. Sie traten und treten ihm Fernsehen auf und gaben und geben Parolen von sich, die man in ihren Büchern wieder findet. Es war und ist zum Kotzen!

Und was produzierten damals die deutschstämmigen Schriftsteller aus dem Banat? Die verschwindend kleine Minderheit in der Minderheit? Gehversuche – aber keine Impulse, weder für die Dissidenz, noch für das geistige Leben in der Region. Während die Intellektuellen in China Maos Anweisungen folgend die Latrinen putzen durften, um die Demut zu erfahren, die christliche Orden ihren Leuten auferlegten, durften die jungen Germanisten aus Temeschburg sogar schreiben und veröffentlichen. Nicht nur jene, die in vorauseilendem Gehorsam in die Partei eingetreten waren und bei aller Belehrungsabsicht und Geschwätzigkeit ganz vergessen hatten, mir von dieser Ruhmestat zu berichten. Kein Werk dieser jungen Dichter und Schriftsteller war da, das eingeschlagen hätte, das begeistert hätte, das jemanden aus der Reserve gelockt hätte. Und als später endlich doch eines aus jenem Umfeld kam, das etwas Staub aufwirbelte – ich aber schon über alle Berge war – bewarf es die Menschen, die auf ein Buch gehofft hatten, mit Kot!

Vieles war nur eine Literatur des Als-ob, der Versuch eines Wollens, der im Ansatz verpuffte und den potentiellen Literaturkonsumenten nicht erreichte. Das galt auch für die weitaus umfassendere rumänische Literatur.

Als Leser hatte man den Eindruck, die Geistlosigkeit der Zeit hätte alle intellektuellen Regungen abgewürgt. Also zog ich auch literarisch die Konsequenzen, blieb bei meinen Vorbildern und setzte andere Prioritäten. Und ergo zog ich es vor, auf meine Weise literarisch tätig zu werden und statt in belletristischen Fiktionen verstrickt, primär essayistisch-narrativ zu agieren, wie ich es in der langen Reihe von Goethe bis zu Thomas Mann gelernt hatte, dem Poeta doctus nach eifernd, der auch etwas – um mit Handke zu sprechen – etwas zu schreiben hat – mit den eindeutigen Schwerpunkten im Historischen wie im Philosophischen, ohne auf Ethik, Ästhetik und Anthropologie verzichten oder deren Denkstrukturen opfern zu müssen. Das objektive, wissenschaftlich fundierte Kunstwerk in der Schublade war mir wichtiger als frustrierte Literatur, die nach außen getragen wurde.

Da die äußeren Bedingungen schlecht waren, und, wollte man sich nicht verbiegen, in ewiger Diskrepanz nur frustrierte Literatur entstehen konnte, war es sinnvoller, in zurückgezogener Einsamkeit künstlerisch zu agieren als exponiert in einer Gesellschaft, die für Kunst keinen Sinn hatte. Trotzdem verfiel ich keiner Passivität, da mein aktives Handeln, über das Schreiben hinaus, auf die politische Handlungsebene verlagert wurde. Im Gegensatz zu anderen Schriftstellern, die unter den Bedingungen des Systems weiter machten, zu denen aber aus diesem Grund kaum noch Affinitäten vorhanden waren und deren Nähe ich ferner nicht mehr suchen sollte, handelte ich nicht, indem ich schrieb, sondern ich handelte primär konkret politisch, um dann den künstlerischen Weg zu beschreiten, der für mich immer auch ein geistig synthetischer und wissenschaftlich verifizierbarer war.

So you want to be a reader? Maybe you’ve never been a reader, maybe you’ve gotten so busy you need help getting back into it, whatever the reason you want to start reading. Even though I’m a certified Language Arts teacher, sometimes I just get out of the rhythm. If you need some help, you’re in luck.

10 simple tips to make you a reader:

1. Start reading book reviews.

2. Read blogs.
They are short, informative, things you are interested in, and you can start reading a little every day to whet your appetite for more. Plus being an educated reader doesn’t just have to be a book reader.

3. Start reading conversations.
Ask other people what they are reading or their last best book. It makes for great conversation, and people who read love to tell you about the story or facts they learned and discovered.

4. Picture books.
I’m not joking. Some of the most fabulous books I’ve ever read were picture books. Some of the most beautiful works of literature I’ve ever read were picture books. Don’t just pick up a Bernstein Bears book, start HERE, and find out why you should start loving literature again or for the first time.

5. Research.
Research a topic you want to know more about by going to the library and searching online. Read all that you can. Learn all that you can. NOW, find a good fictional book about that topic. If it’s the Civil War, learn all you can. Then read a great fictional book that was either written during that era or about that topic. (Uncle Tom’s Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe) Finally, pair all of your research with another great form of media that centers on your research (music, movie, play…etc. watch Gone With the Wind). Finally, do something as your output (write a blog about what you learned or have a good conversation about it).

6. Read your Bible.
Seems simple, but do you do it every day? Next step, read some books about theology and find out why you believe what you do or what other people say about what you are reading. Or get some great word study tools!

7. Consistency.
Forming any new habit means being consistent, even when you aren’t enjoying it. Part of being a great reader is just plain practice. Read every day. Period. If possible read at the same time every day.

8. Get rid of the junk food in the house.
It’s been proven that people who eat junk food or fast food crave it more often. Get rid of the junk reading in the house. Get rid of the Cosmopolitan magazine, turn off Facebook statuses in the evening, and get the reality tv off. The more you put in junk, the more the junk takes over.

9. Don’t only read the same things.
Reading is about having a balanced diet. It’s like exercise. You may love to run, but if you only run eventually you will get bored. So switch things up and make them interesting. It will keep you reading longer.

10. Start small.
Don’t try and start a huge book if you haven’t been reading much lately. Start by reading the lyrics to your favorite music or pick up a book of poetry and read some poems. Don’t overwhelm yourself. Pace yourself. And soon you will be reading quicker and enjoying it more.

OK! Now make your favorite book recommendations below!