Showing posts with label Feminist Theory. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Feminist Theory. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Final Paper

The assignment from Dr. Logan:


The assigned texts for this course barely scratch the surface of literary representations of women in early America.  As scholars of American literature, we will investigate this field more deeply by conducting primary and secondary research and developing projects that add original insight to the conversation about this topic.  To that end, each of you will choose for your research project one text (or set of texts, in some instances) from those listed (separate handout), all of which are lesser-known and infrequently taught.  You will then spend the semester completing successive stages of a research project on this novel, from learning the publication history of the text to developing an initial bibliography using various databases to writing abstracts of critical articles to completing and peer-reviewing drafts and presenting your work at a final LIT 6216 conference, to be held during the final exam period.  

[Submitted 7 December 2010]


Bonds of Intimacy: 
The Female Homosocial and Lesbian Continuum in Milcah Martha Moore’s Book

The women of Milcah Martha Moore’s Book are old, middle aged, young, married, single, widowed, separated from their husbands, excommunicated from their church, have children, are childless, have suffered the death of loved ones, participate in different sects of Christianity, and represent varied economic backgrounds.  Despite these cultural, social, and religious, and economic differences, preserved in Moore’s handwritten commonplace book are bonds of female friendship in the form of poetry and prose, authored by women for women.  These bonds of intimacy create a female homosocial space, in which the lesbian continuum functions as a measuring rubric for these bonds.


The 1997 modern critical edition of Milcah Martha Moore’s Book (hereafter MMMB) makes accessible previously ignored women’s writing in early American literature through Moore’s commonplace book, a rare example of the non-traditional format.  I say non-traditional in that the commonplace book existed in manuscript rather than printed form, and because the genre’s origins are closely tied to the education of men.  The commonplace books by male authors of this time period have received critical attention; women’s commonplace books are, more recently, pushed into the scholarly spotlight.  Catherine La Courreye Blecki and Karin A. Wulf, the editors, provide invaluable scholarship regarding the cultural, social, manuscript, and print culture of revolutionary Philadelphia and emphasize the bonds of friendship connecting the contributing authors and editor of the manuscript.  This essay extends Blecki’s and Wulf’s reading of female friendship by using feminist theories to explore the physical object of Moore’s commonplace book as a site of the female homosocial and lesbian continuum.  This argument is strengthened by a selective reading of friendship themed prose and verse entries from MMMB.


I argue that Moore’s commonplace book preserves the work of Susanna Wright, Hannah Griffitts, and Elizabeth Graeme Fergusson, thereby establishing a female homosocial presence through the dominance of female authorship within the text.  Though other themes are represented, the text opens with “An Essay on Friendship” by Griffitts, thereby signaling the tone and theme of the work as a whole.  Drawing on literary scholarship of Susan Stabile and Ivy Schweitzer, feminist scholarship of Adrienne Rich and Eve Sedgwick, and history of the book scholarship from Kevin J. Hayes, I illustrate the relationship between the strategies of defiance and non-compliance in regards to the readership, authorship, and female friendship in MMMB and the ways in which these relationships create a female homosocial space.




Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Book 'em, Brontës!

If you don’t have a sense of humor, skip this post.  And stop being such a stick in the mud.




My favorite lines:
  • “It's the Brontë sisters, super powered English authors from the nineteenth-century!”
  • “Girls can't write books, ha, ha, ha!”
  • Sisters: We're boys.
          Evil literary male critic: Guys, your books have revolutionized 
          the Gothic Romance novel!  They're awesome.

          Sisters: Well, the jokes on you, narrow minded cur.  We are women!

          Evil literary male critic: What?  No one wants to read books by girls, get out of here!
  • “Book 'em, Brontës!”
  • “Together the Brontës wrote books about confident, independent women.  Now they join forces again to become the all-powerful BRONTËSAURUS!”
  • “Brontësaurus comes with barrier-breaking feminist vision!”

Sunday, November 28, 2010

Advice for Young Girls

Presented, without comment, for your enjoyment.  


PS - I am not responsible if you spit your drink all over your keyboard from laughing while watching these videos, so do us all a favor and put your drink down now.  Thanks.

Advice for Young Girls From a Cartoon Princess: The Little Mermaid



Advice for Young Girls From a Cartoon Princess: Belle




Advice for Young Girls From a Cartoon Princess: Snow White



Monday, November 15, 2010

Tweet, Tweet

The following articles came from my Twitter feed, and are posted in no particular order.


    • “That's a fabulous learning experience by any estimation, but the HASTAC way is to not just create new technologies but to think critically about those technologies, what they mean, how they apply to society or to individual rights and aspirations.   It is also important to transform creating and critiquing into pedagogical practice” (Davidson).
    • Just a quick reminder that the (technological) world apparently revolves around the United States, as illustrated by Australian and New Zealanders’ frustration over time lags for e-books.
    • I might have had to wipe the drool from my keyboard after reading through the panel descriptions.  And in the words of Liz Lemon, “I want to go to there.”


The following articles came from friends, Facebook, and my own web browsing.  These too are posted in no particular order.


    • To quote Battlestart Galactica, “All this has happened before, and it will happen again.”  That quote was running through my head as I read this article, which provoked a riot of emotions and to be honest, made me queasy.  The attitude of the fathers (and husbands) in this article immediately made me think of Cotton Mather, feme coverture, and the idealized motherhood of the republican mother from post-Revolutionary America.  This is not good, not good at all.    

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Raise Your Glass

“So raise your glass if you are wrong in all the right ways” (Pink).


Let’s be honest.  Most little girls, teenagers, and women don’t learn how to be feminists from reading scholarship.  They learn from each other, from mass media (TV, movies, magazines, websites, radio, plays, etc), from their parents and family, and from social experience.  And while some girls and women do seek feminist scholarship to guide their experience, I venture that most don’t – academic scholarship is usually written in intimidating jargon and unless published as a book, is inaccessible to elementary, middle and high school girls.  


Of course, there are exceptions, especially girls who create their own zines and websites (think LiveJournal), or write for feminist sites like Bitch Media (established 1996) and Jezebel.com (established 2007).  But let me just say, neither of these existed when I was in middle school and high school (I graduated in 1999 – but I didn’t find out about Bitch until college*).  Instead, like I said above, girls and women learn from their social experiences, which for better or worse are highly shaped and influenced by social media.


*I bought my sister a year long subscription + a journal for her Christmas present after I discovered Bitch.

Growing up, I was influenced by female musicians – Madonna, Mariah Carey, Whitney Houston, Salt-n-Peppa, TLC, Janet Jackson, En Vogue, and more.  Later in high school, I adored Gwen Steffani and despised The Spice Girls.  And if you told me back in 2000 when Pink’s first album debuted that I would tell you today that Pink is my new feminist hero, I’d probably laugh in your face.  


Here’s the deal.  I am obsessed with the song “Glitter in the Air” and I didn’t realize it was Pink who sang it – my sister clued me in.  So last week I purchased my first CD in roughly two years, Pink’s Funhouse.  I can’t lie – I’ve listened to the whole album, all the way through, at least four times in less than a week while driving in my car.  Last night I spent two hours watching all of Pink’s videos on her YouTube Channel.  I know, I have no life.  While watching her videos, I realized that Pink is a feminist, albeit a slightly unconventional one.  I’m going to direct your attention to two videos in particular, “Raise Your Glass” and “Stupid Girls.”      


Briefly, the issues raised/addressed in “Raise Your Glass” video: female obesity, gay marriage, feminist icons (Rosie the Riveter), animal cruelty (protesting of killing bulls, milking cows), race issues, outcasts, culture clashes (gangsters, skateboarders), beauty ideals, religion, sex, and education.  All of this in less than 3 minutes, 22 seconds.  Damn, she’s good.  


A portion of the lyrics:
So raise your glass if you are wrong
In all the right ways
All my underdogs, we will never be
Anything but loud
And nitty gritty
Dirty little freaks
Won’t you come on, and come on, and
Raise your glass
Just come on and come and 
Raise your glass


Watch it for yourself.



The “Stupid Girls” video cracked me up, I couldn’t stop laughing.  It’s rather scathing in its condemnation of stupid girls (Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, etc.).  My favorite part of the lyrics:
I’m so glad that I’ll never fit in
That will never be me
Outcasts and girls with ambition
That’s what I wanna see
I love the image of Pink, dressed in a rather conservative outfit with glasses, standing behind a podium – insinuating that our fight for a woman president is far from over.


Watch it for yourself.




So while academic scholarship might not agree with me, I think Pink can and does act as a feminist hero.  What do you think?  You can check out the rest of her videos on her YouTube Channel, or visit her official website to read through her song lyrics.  Let me know.

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Location! Location! Location!

[click image for larger image]
[© Jorge Cham, PhD Comics]


I was unhappy with my paper proposal, so I asked Dr. Logan if I could meet with her to go over it (on October 25).  After a productive brainstorming session, she mentioned that my proposal would be a good fit for a conference presentation, specifically the Florida Consortium for Women’s and Gender Studies Conference at Florida Atlantic University.  


So, I’m excited to announce that I will, after revisions, submit my abstract/paper proposal for the conference in April 2011.  My previous conference experience is limited to Sigma Tau Delta’s International Convention in 2004 (“A Pleasant Walk, A Pleasant Talk”) – I did not submit a paper.  I attended with another officer of our chapter for the workshops and paper presentations, which were amazing, and I greatly enjoyed our guest speaker Sarah Vowell.  To be honest, at the time, I didn’t even know that undergraduates could do such a thing – submit papers for conferences.  I plan on rectifying that misunderstanding during my graduate study career.


Below is the call for papers for the conference, courtesy of Dr. Logan.  I hope that some of my classmates will submit their proposals too.


CALL FOR PAPERS


Florida Consortium for Women’s and Gender Studies Conference
Florida Atlantic University
Boca Raton, Florida
April 1-2, 2011


Gendered and Racialized Technologies of Change: 
Moving Discredited Knowledge from the Margins to the Center


We understand “gendered and racialized technologies of change” to comprise the techniques and practices through which feminists and queer activists generate change in the organization of social, political, and economic relations. The purpose of this conference is to cross disciplinary boundaries and bring together feminist and queer discourses regarding these technologies. 


We welcome individual papers, panels and roundtables or workshops as well as innovative presentational formats from scholars, activists, and graduate students addressing, but not limited to, the following issues:

  • Activist Strategies
  • Civil and Human Rights
  • Sexual Bodies, Sexualized Bodies, and Body Politics
  • The Military Industrial Complex
  • Corporate Culture
  • The Feminization of Poverty
  • Migration and Globalization
  • The Changing (and Same Old) Faces of Oppression
  • Intersections of the Local and the Global
  • Environment
  • Health and/or Women Healers
  • New Media
  • Popular Culture
  • The Sacred and the Spiritual
  • Visual and Performing Arts
  • Science and Technology
  • Pedagogy

Selected conference papers may be included in the Consortium anthology published by Cambridge Scholars Press. Past anthologies of conference papers include: Many Floridas: Women Envisioning Change (2007), Florida without Borders: Women at the Intersections of the Local and Global (2008), and Femininities and Masculinities in a Global Context (currently in press).


To apply, please submit a 250-500 words double-spaced abstract. Abstracts should include the presenter’s contact information and brief vita. Deadline for submissions is January 15th, 2011. 

  • Graduate Student abstracts should be sent via e-mail to Megan Halena at mhalena@fau.edu
  • All other abstracts should be sent via e-mail to Josephine Beoku-Betts at wsc@fau.edu
  • Final decisions on submitted abstracts will be sent by February 28th, 2011

For more information on the FAU Center for Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies M.A. degree program, please visit our website: http://www.fau.edu/WomensStudies/




Works Cited:
Cham, Jorge. "Call for Papers!" Comic strip. PhD: Piled Higher & Deeper. 25 June 2010. Web. 9 Nov. 2010. <http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1335>.

Monday, November 8, 2010

You Are Not Alone

Remember the Cosmo PostSecret card I posted about in October?  Apparently, it gets a lot of mileage.  This article at Bitch Magazine made me smile - I hope you enjoy it too.











Sunday, November 7, 2010

Bits and Pieces

Articles:
    • First of all, I love that Jessica saw this article and thought of me.  
    • Second, yes, we can and MUST create a national digital library.  One thing that stood out to me, and maybe this is because I’m so incredibly immersed in women’s writing, the female homosocial, and the lesbian continuum because of this project, is that Robert Darnton only quotes MEN in his original article – Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams.  And to that, I call shenanigans.  Last time I looked, plenty of women in our past wrote about the link between shared knowledge, literacy, education, and the democracy (and we continue to do so to this day!).  And in fact, women are completely absent from his article, unless we are counted under the gender-neutral umbrella of “citizenship.”  
    • Despite my anger at the distinct lack of women, past and present, from Darnton’s article, yes, I agree – a national digital library, connected to a larger international library (an index of ALL digital libraries) needs to happen, as soon as possible.  Cooperation is needed on all levels – state, federal, private corporations, universities, colleges, the government – I think you get the picture.  And obviously, copyright is one of the biggest hurdles we face, so why not start with texts with expired copyrights, or texts that reside in special collections?  You can see that Darnton has the same idea in his reply to Simpson.  Anyways, read the articles and tell me what you think.   

Cool sites:
    • I found this site by accident the night my contextual documents assignment was due, Friday the 5th.  I Googled something like “essays on female friendship by women” and this popped up in the results.  It’s amazing!  I already posted the link to our WebCourses discussion board so my classmates and Dr. Logan could see it.  I’m hoping that Dr. Logan and our English Department will grant us permission to create a shell page on the UCF server that will link to all of our projects, as well as Dr. Logan’s students’ previous digital projects (whew, that was a mouthful). 
    • The University of Michigan site is cumulative – so far, 143 students have contributed 54 projects, working in groups from 1999 through the present.  It’s quite impressive, especially when you see the levels of cooperation – professors, undergraduate students, graduate students, and doctoral students, as well as interdisciplinary cooperation (different departments).  
    • What I love most about this site is that it is student driven and created – these are our peers, our equals.  I think sometimes that scholarship can seem intimidating because of the author, or difficult to understand (or unpack as Dr. Jones says) because of all the jargon most of which as students we’re still learning about.  These pages, on the other hand, are written in the same language and style that we are familiar with because it is our own.  So please, take a couple of minutes to explore their site and let me know what you think.
    • This site also popped up in my Google results for “essays on female friendship by women” and I thought my classmates would enjoy looking through it.  The author, Beeskep, has three other sites that straddle the time periods of our class, which I’ve listed below.

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Paper Proposal

The assignment from Dr. Logan:


Call for Papers!  LIT 6216:  Unruly Women in Early American Literature.

The organizers of the LIT 6216 Scholars Group announce a call for papers to be presented at its final graduate student conference on Tuesday, December 7, 2010 from 7-9:50 p.m.  The conference will explore representations of women as transgressive or unruly; “unruly” is understood in a broad sense in the context of early American gender norms.  Topics might include women whose experiences were out of the ordinary (captivity, travel, etc.), women who broke laws or defied dominant cultural mores and/or values, cross-dressing women, etc.  Exploration of different textual forms  is welcome, including sentimental or historical novels, speeches, conversion narratives, crime and execution narratives,  short fiction, autobiography (including diaries memoirs, journals), biography, letters, poetry, etc.  Papers should engage with the scholarly conversation in early American literary studies, including a knowledge of the historical and cultural context in which the text was produced.   Please send questions and/or submit your abstract to Dr. Lisa M. Logan by 10/22/10.

Conference format:  Papers for this conference will be circulated beforehand and discussed (rather than read) at the conference meeting. 

See Research Project Components for more details.


[Submitted 24 October 2010]

Jay Jay Stroup

Graduate Student, UCF
jayjaystroup@knights.ucf.edu


Bonds of Intimacy: 
Locating the Female Homosocial & Lesbian Continuum in Milcah Martha Moore’s Book

The modern critical edition of Milcah Martha Moore’s Book, published in 1997, exposes previously ignored women’s writing in early American literature.  Moore’s commonplace book, an unpublished, non-traditional format, is now accessible to all scholars.  While Catherine Blecki and Karin Wulf provide invaluable scholarship regarding the culture of the Philadelphia, as well as manuscript and print culture during the Revolutionary era, there is no mention of Queer or Feminist theory.  The possibility of locating the female homosocial and lesbian continuum in MMMB is hinted at through Blecki’s and Wulf’s multiple references to female friendship, but not made explicit.  It is my intent to strengthen these references through the use of Queer and Feminist theories, and explore the physical object of Moore’s commonplace book as a site of the female homosocial and lesbian continuum in early American literature.     

Moore’s commonplace book simultaneously preserves the work of Susanna Wright, Hannah Griffitts, and Elizabeth Graeme Fergusson and establishes a female homosocial presence through the dominance of female authorship within the text.  Out of the one hundred and twenty six entries, sixty three of them are authored by Griffitts (exactly fifty percent of the entries), twenty five are authored by Wright, and three by Graeme Fergusson.  Though other themes are represented, the text opens with “An Essay on Friendship” by Griffitts, thereby signaling the tone and theme of the work as a whole.  Through the use of Susan Stabile’s scholarship on the relationship between memory and the archive, and commonplacing as a distinctly feminized art I argue that not only does the text operate on the lesbian continuum, it also transgresses normative female behavior for colonial America in terms of reading and authorship.  I am relying on the scholarship of Kevin J. Hayes (A Colonial Woman’s Bookshelf) to provide evidence of normative and transgressive reading experiences of women during colonial America.   

Adrienne Rich’s "Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence" highlights the way in which behavior not ascribing to strict hetero-normative standards is punished, the concept of which is transferable to MMMB: Griffitts and Wright refuse to marry, Moore is thrown out of the Society of Friends for marriage to a cousin, and Graeme Fergusson’s secret marriage to a Tory ruins her economically, socially, and politically.  While Carroll Smith-Rosenberg’s "The Female World of Love and Ritual: Relations between Women in Nineteenth-Century America" deals with literature and behavior of the 1800s, there are markers of the female homosocial and lesbian continuum that are also applicable to MMMB, specifically in the entries dealing with female friendship.  

By focusing the lens of Queer theory on a commonplace book from early American literature, strategies of defiance and non-compliance by women in regards to their sexuality, readership and authorship are brought to light.  It is the strategies of defiance contained within that classify MMMB as an unruly text, authored and edited by unruly women.  Re-identifying the commonplace book as a site of the female homosocial expands, rather than contracts, the possibilities for future scholarship.  This identification invites and encourages the co-mingling of other schools of theory – feminist, racial, cultural, historical, economical and more.  

Friday, October 15, 2010

Abstract

The assignment from Dr. Logan:  

An abstract is a summary of a scholarly work.  Your abstract will be followed by analysis, linking the scholar’s argument to your proposed project.  Please attach a PDF* of your chosen text to the email when you hand it in.

*I’ve embedded the GoogleBooks preview of Stabile’s book here.


[Submitted 15 October 2010]

Stabile, Susan M.  "Introduction: The Genealogy of Memory."  Memory's Daughters: The Material Culture of Remembrance in Eighteenth-Century America.  NY: Cornell UP, 2004.  1-16. Print.

Stabile’s introduction opens with “glossing over historical realities,” citing the destruction of Deborah Logan’s house to make way for the Second Bank of the United States as an example.  This example illuminates the tension between domestic and public memory existing in early American national history.  Women approach national memory building via genealogical associations grounded in the family and the home.  Stabile defines these associations as “the local, the particular, the domestic” (4).  Women’s aim, unlike men’s, is to accurately recreate the historical record, without the intent to invoke the past and fashion the future (4).  Logan is known by her peers as “a celebrated keeper of cultural memory,” prized for her “careful transcription, preservation, and publication of historical manuscripts” (4)*1.  Stabile explores the etymology of archive, introducing its dual function: “both a physical place and a metaphor for memory” (8).  The thesis of the book is clear, to return the archive to its “properly domestic origins,” allowing the house to become “a site of memory, history and knowledge” (9).  In addition, this relocation exposes the preservation, rather than petrifying, of cultural memory, placing women in the center of early American history, rescuing them from exile on the outskirts (9).  Included are brief biographies of Susanna Wright, Hannah Griffitts, Elizabeth Graeme Fergusson and Annis Boudinot Stockton, plus their intertwining webs of kinship and friendship.  Stabile refers to women’s use and adaptation of the commonplace book genre, stating “the commonplace book recuperates the house, and the female mind, as locales of knowledge and memory” (10).  The commonplace book is simultaneously a physical object representing rhetorical topi and a text, embodying “the very stuff of memory making” (15).  The women of early American history characterize “commonplacing and other domestic arts” as a distinctly feminine art, demonstrating a subversive strategy to reunite women, memory, and knowledge.

By relocating the archive, and thereby the house, to their “proper domestic origins,” Stabile opens the floodgates of analysis for a feminist perspective of the role of memory and archiving in early American history/literature.  She validates and attaches value to the art of commonplacing and other domestic arts which our patriarchal-biased history stripped away over the course of time.  By including unpublished texts and domestic artifacts, Stabile forcibly expands the canon of early American women’s literature.  Her approach is interdisciplinary: architectural theory plays a large role in the book, and sources include historic house museums, societies dedicated to historic preservation, and experts on “early American textiles, metals, and furniture” (xi).  Questions that Stabile’s introduction provoked: in what way does MMMB challenge the creation of a “national memory”?*2  How does Stabile’s concept of archive complicate and/or compliment the genre of commonplace books?  Is MMMB subversive?  Does Moore appear in the later chapters and did she know Deborah Logan?


Footnotes:
1.  This description is almost identical to the ones used to describe Milcah Martha Moore in MMMB.
2.  Stabile describes national memory: “The construction of a ‘national memory’ demands consensus, imposing a ‘duty to remember’ in a kind of fixed and reverential relationship to the past.  At the same time, it requires material reminders for future veneration” (3).

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Who stole literature? Why, feminists did!

I’m currently in the library, diligently working on my preliminary bibliography.  However, the UCF computer network is erratic beyond belief (upgrade your servers, you cheapskates!), so I took a break from MLA International Bibliography to look through my actual books, specifically Rita Felski’s Literature after Feminism.  I intended to only skim through the introduction, to determine whether or not it applied to my project, but she sucked me in and I read the whole thing (22 pages).  And now I am begging you, pleading with you, no, make that commanding you to read it as well.  It’s that good.  It’s amazing.  It’s kick-ass. 


Don’t believe me?  Here’s the first paragraph.


I have been reading a lot about myself lately, and most of what I read is not very flattering.  Although I’m a lapsed Catholic, I’ve seen myself described as a “remorseless Puritan” or even, in one gloriously overwrought phrase, as a “destroying angel.”  When I’m not ushering in the apocalypse, I am being cast as a hatchet-faced harridan and paid-up member of the thought police.  I am told that I indoctrinate my students, ruthlessly crush any expression of dissent, and execrate anything written by a dead white male.  Neither my motives nor my personality have anything to recommend them; I am bitter, hostile, resentful, and, it appears, utterly irrational. (1)


Luckily for you, my commanded reader, a preview of Literature after Feminism is available via GoogleBooks, which I’m embedding below.  You’ve run out of excuses thanks to technology, muahaha.   


PS – The introduction goes on to explain Felski’s purpose: “By interweaving theory and literary example I hope to show how feminism has influenced our view of literary works and how those works, in turn, speak back to feminism” (21).  The book is organized “around four key aspects of literary study: readers, authors, plots, and the question of aesthetic value” (20).
Works Cited:
Felski, Rita.  Literature after Feminism.  Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2003.  Print.  

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Surprises in the mail

Sometime last week, I decided to reward myself by purchasing two items off my Amazon Wish List.  But, I argued with myself, the two items had to be academically related.  We had mentioned Rita Felski’s Literature after Feminism in class discussion either that week (or the week before) and so I wouldn’t forget about it, I placed it on my wish list right after class.  I figured, this must be a sign that I need to buy this text, especially since I’ll be using a mixture of Queer and Feminist theory for my research project.  I also decided to finally buy a copy of Eats, Shoots & Leaves by Lynne Truss, which has been on my wish list for almost two years now.  I placed my order and then promptly forgot about it, caught up in working on my class presentation, handout, and paper for the 14th of September (today).

Well, sometime this afternoon, while I was at the library from 11:30 am until 5:15 pm, my books arrived from Amazon!  Such a happy, sweet surprise, even if it did come from myself.  Check ‘em out below (and ignore the slight blurriness of the picture).  I’m going to browse through Eats, Shoots & Leaves, eat some leftover candy, and then crash.