Review: Prism of Love in The Purple Moon

All poems are love poems on some level. Whether about love of life, death, or everything in between, poems isolate and pinpoint the most sublime parts of life anyone can imagine. However, love, and poetry, can be deceptively simple. This simplicity is the highlight of Neelam Saxena Chandra's book of poetry, The Purple Moon. Beginning with the unique concept of a whole book of poems in which life is seen through the prism of love, Neelam takes on a series of relationships, romantic, familial, platonic, through the dimension of this nebulous emotion. In fact, love isn't an emotion in this book of poetry. It is a state of being. Every wave of love that goes through this prism shines on some unexpected aspect of love that we tend to know and accept, but only recognize when we put them in words.

One of my favorite poems uses a deceptively simple metaphor of the hyphen. Neelam writes in the first stanza of Radha-Krishna:

"Whenever she wished
To put a full stop,
He put a hyphen
And let the story
Begin again
Like another fairy tale
Where anticipations grow,
Where desires glow
And where
Love shines."

It is important to note that Neelam is an Indian author living in India so both the cultural and aesthetic quality of her poems is influenced by this experience. Before I had read Neelam's book of poems, in my "American ignorance," I had not heard of the famous Hindu Radha-Krishna love story in which a love affair is seen as an union between the human soul and the divine, manifested in the physical.

It is this spiritual and physical union that I see uniquely at play in Neelam's ambitious book of poems. Americans tend to emphasize one over the other depending on what type of love is spoken about--and many times the physical and/or spiritual is referenced in such a way that is detrimental to the whole mission of love in the relationship between those in love or experiencing love.

For Neelam, all experience is love, but only though a specific prism, perhaps always under the "purple moon" do we really see beyond the shimmering light to the true nature, into the evergreen nature of love.

The Purple Moon is available online at https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=qIlFAwAAQBAJ

The year of the writer

We have officially entered the age of the writer. At least writers now have the ability to bypass the traditional stranglehold of talent and access to audience that was the earmark of publishing for years.

Much has been said about the upsides and downsides of the increasing ease there is in self- or small press publishing. But one interesting aspect that I don't think has been addressed in terms of this literacy revolution is how this ease "democratizes" writing. No longer is writing the purview of the agented, the rich, or even the talented.

In fact, it could be argued that talent/originality and success in publishing don't go hand and hand. In my opinion, the ease in publishing means a complete upending of literacy in general.

Democratizing all media, from the written word to video to music, is here to stay. My question is, what model of success, fulfillment, or even progress can there be in this open access?  What transformation will we see as literate human beings?

Because I think we are on the verge of something pretty remarkable.

To read more about my "years" as a writer, you can find my books at http://amazon.com/author/Melissa

The myth of "pushing" content

Recently I was introduced to the model of "pushing" free content in order to get financial benefit in two different contexts.

On the one hand, there was the hypnotic "spiritual course" I recently took (it wasn't sold as that--it was supposed to be a way to reach "Unlimited Abundance" using the Silva Mind Control Method).

I really appreciated its meditative quality and how it can be a useful tool to reach the vibratory levels needed to feel and give love in our universe. However, its intent was to teach people how to manifest wealth (which I do believe is possible) while at the same time asking people to line the pockets of the creators of this course.

The second was a book called "Flow" available on Amazon. I am not sure if the actual ebook was free since my husband downloaded it on to my Kindle. But after going to the site of the author, Ian Hollander, it was clear to me that his business model was the same as the first example.

He urged the reader to lure people with good content and offer a service, but not telling them what it costs up front. Mind you, 99 percent of the content was on the mark--this is a criticism of the advice in the book to "push" material in order to make a profit.

Pushing content is a type of seduction.

I am all for seduction in the bedroom. It is the dance between men and women (or in a same sex context). I am even for seduction when it is "complicated."

However it is my firm belief seduction shouldn't be part of the general interaction between consenting adults in a public social context when money is involved. That is just a form of "dirty" money.

If you are offering a pure and wholesome connection with another human being, let people know up front what something costs. Don't show them a hundred bells and whistles and then say, btw, it will cost you a mere one time deal of $97 or a one time deal of two payments of $99 (AND GET IT QUICK!)

This is what slimy car salesmen do.

Recently I had someone in politics ask me to do some image consulting and my interaction was the exact opposite of seduction.

1. He explained exactly what he wanted me to do, what service he wanted me to provide, and I talked about what I could and could not do in return.

2. He then asked me what I would charge. I said, flat rate $3000, with a $500 deposit for three months of image consulting/coaching.

3. I pointed out how and when he would do social things (foopahs) that made me uncomfortable and pointed out how I thought certain behaviors of his might be interpreted.

4. I admitted when I didn't know the answer for a specific image related issue and suggested going to another person for advice on that particular matter.

5. I wouldn't swerve from what we had initially agreed upon unless we renegotiated.

What was I "doing"? I was modeling integrity. I can't imagine a better image than being an ethical and upfront person (although a cynic might actually see integrity as a detriment in politics).

Integrity can't be bought and sold. It can only be demonstrated in how we interact with each other. And if we truly want to connect with other human beings and not just see them as means to an end, and not feel used or like we are using others, we have to be up front when it comes to money.

Leave seduction in the bedroom.

We can't _push_ the "flow" or unlimited abundance when living authentically and wholly. We have to live with integrity and let our innate bright light lead to whatever the universe wants for us. This is being in the flow.

Feel free to find out more about my metaphysical views in my new book --info at http://smallbookofwisdom.com

However, be forewarned, it costs $1.07 on Amazon.com ;)

Great Mechanical Man. Great Mechanical Heart. (Movie Review)

Recently, my husband and I watched the sweet movie, "The Great Mechanical Man" on Amazon Prime. We hadn't seen a single advertisement, and the only reason it looked interesting was that the characters were played by actors, Jenna Fischer (The Office) and Chris Messina (Mindy) I recognized and it was Mother's Day and I didn't want anything emotionally taxing (see my book Joy, Interrupted if you don't know why).

Also, I watched the trailer:

I like quirky characters and Jenna's character reminded me of myself. Head in the clouds, misunderstood by others, people think they know what is right for her and not understanding her true nature --completely on the mark.

The male protagonist reflected some of the reasons I fell in love with my husband: sincere, committed, disdains people who are materialistic and really wanting the emotional support of a partner (the ex is hell on wheels).

The movie reminded me of why I love LOVE. It allows you to see the best (and of course worst) about yourself, reaffirms your values, and allows you to express what you think if beautiful in the world.

I was also struck by the issue of aging in this movie. Although the "heart" in the movie is unchanging, the characters are pure and simple in a child-like fashion, they are past 35. As I approach age 40 (less than one year!), it was nice seeing a female protagonist with wrinkles, a fairly unbecoming hairstyle, and bulky winter clothes find love--and personal transformation.

And what was so wonderful was that when she had the Epiphany that her wants and needs meant something and that being with someone who loved her for who she was, her face lit up and she was truly beautiful in a way that the more traditionally beautiful adopted sister (played by Malin Akermin) couldn't hold a torch to.

Overall, if you want to see something light, charming, and will warm your heart, a definite date night movie.

On a side note, from a publishing point of view it was interesting to see that I chose this movie because of it being advertised on Amazon prime. No inundation of ads, constant nagging of popular culture saturation, just a serendipitous moment -- it reminded me that all creative works find their home, with a little help from a platform.

Speaking of platforms, my books are also on Amazon :-)

http://amazon.com/author/melissa

Is the common wisdom about pen names true?

One of the ongoing debates in the publishing world is whether or not you should write under different pen names. I have heard of two arguments for using a pen name. My question is, are these arguments fallacies?


1. Fame don't get me down

The standard wisdom is that famous authors use pen names to test their writing gumption without the trappings of fame. Basically, if their talents show through even though you have no idea who the writer is. The most famous example of this is JK Rowling writing under a pseudonym. I suppose this is an ego check for famous authors.

2. Don't confuse the readers
Another common refrain is that readers want predictability from their favorite authors. They read a certain book because there is a certain name on the book. For example, people read Stephen King because they predict the horror novel genre. The underlying premise of this argument is that readers have a comfort zone and asking them to step out of it threatens fan loyalty.

However, aren't we are writers in a new world since the land of uber-writers? Yes, there are going to be super mainstream American famous writers, but the old publishing model in which major publisher's had a strangle hold on marketing to writers is crumbling.

Just recently there was news that the last vestiges of BIG BOX PUBLISHING, Barnes & Noble was closing their storefronts. Amazon is now the new way of the publishing world, and e-publishing in general is not just the wave of the future--it is the here and now.

Publishers aren't going to be able to rest their laurels on common wisdom. So, as writers, should we? Should we believe that our reputations are separate from our talents? Is there anything such as pure art if you don't have an established marketing base or lots of money to throw at promoting a project? Do we have to coddle our audiences and only give them what to expect? Or is smart, challenging and thought-provoking writing a genre in itself?

These are all questions that are guiding my developing my craft and thinking about my publishing trajectory.

What are yours?

Trailer to new book, Resurrecting Arcadia