FanGrrl Updates the Boxing Scene

With a brief note up front to say that we found a different house in the same neighborhood that's much better than the casita delapidado, and we're working on closing; we probably will move shortly after the turn of the new year, so I'm probably going to be scattershot with my blog posts. On the other hand, I can also see the possibility of ranting endlessly about moving, etc. So who knows?

In the world of boxing, Tommy Karpency had another fight -- the day before Thanksgiving, because we certainly couldn't allow Dante's Virgil to both visit family she hasn't seen in forever and watch her favorite sport and boxer all at the same time. We must deny her one or the other. Argh. Further, I had to pass up the chance to jeer and boo at the absolute worst opponent's name in the history of boxing.

His name was Mike McFail.

Seriously.

McFail. Why do things have to work out so that I can't go yell "MCFAIL!!!!!" at Tommy's fight? Just not fair. And yes, he's a real person. Here is his boxing record. He's 120th in the United States -- which means they put Tommy up against another "jobber" (no offense to McFail).

Here's the story:

Karpency crushes McFail

WBA Fedecentro light heavy titleholder Tommy Karpency (19-1-1, 12 KOs) knocked out normally durable veteran Mike McFail in the third round Wednesday night. A vicious Karpency left hook to the body dropped McFail to the canvas, and referee Mike Napple halted the contest after McFail was unable to survive the count. Highlighting the undercard, local welterweight prospect Matt Bershire (9-1-1, 4 KOs) looked impressive in stopping trialhorse Eric Burke in the fifth of their scheduled six rounder. In addition, local middleweight Paul Pindroh (1-0) won a four round unanimous decision over Francisco Portillo in a battle of debut boxers. All scores were 38-37. Simons’ Promotions next scheduled card will take place January 29th and the main event will feature Tommy Karpency defending his WBA Fedecentro title against light heavy Dallas Vargas (22-4).

Please note the last bolded part. Tommy needs to be up against better talent, because it's too easy for him at this point to keep knocking weak opponents on the canvas. I've seen too many fights that look on paper like they would be great opponents, but in reality one boxer has only ever been "spoon fed" weak or over the hill boxers, and never really took on serious competition. Tommy needs to be in with people who are hungrier, like Chuck "The Professor" Mussachio (his last fight). Dallas Vargas is just that person.

Vargas is a huge step up for Tommy, because he's #11 in the US right now; Tommy is #12. This looks like it could be one of those fights that shows whether either of them are really prepared to be so close to the top ten in the US. Vargas has five years more of professional experience and nearly ten years in age on Tommy. Out of Vargas' six most recent fights, though, he's lost two. Tommy hasn't. Of course, it all depends on just who it is you're fighting. Vargas lost to the #1 ranked French super middle weight fighter Jean Paul Mendy (also #31 in the world) and to Jesse Brinkley, the #5 US super middle weight fighter (and #14 in the world). So, it's not like he's losing to chumps. Super middleweights, though, only get up to 168 pounds. So, Vargas is returning to his original weight class to fight Tommy (light heavyweights are 168 to 175 pounds). Usually, if you're going to go to a different weight class, it's better to cut down to the class below you and pound them with the fact that you only have to cut down a few pounds, but they have to bulk up to stay at that weight. But that obviously didn't work so well for Vargas, because he's actually been a light heavyweight more or less the whole time -- he cut down for those fights. I can sort of see why he chose to try boxing in a different weight class, because the light heavyweight division is kind of stagnant. The really good ones rarely fight each other, or if they do, it's the same pairing you've already seen a bunch of times. There's not the kind of churn that you get in the lighter weight divisions.

Vargas scares the shit out of me. It's gonna be great!

The tickets are probably going to cost more. Hmph. JP, make your arrangements NAO. January 29 you have some place to be!

-- DV

Things are getting serious. I may have to ramp up my fangrrl participation levels.

Una Casita Para Mi?

So, for the first time ever, we're contemplating buying a house. We could have bought something all along, but we've been reluctant to spend what we have (because then it's gone) in a place we're not sure we'll stay in in order to take on a mortgage that might be the same as our rent or higher. It didn't make sense for a few years. But El Hijo has probably a year and a half on the dissertation, and then we're probably looking at a transition year or a year apart :( for the job market -- if we're that lucky on a first plunge into the job market for profs in his field. On top of that, a little house just a block away is for sale. So, we're looking into it.

And by "little" I really mean TINY. Hence, why I'm calling it a Casita instead of a Casa! I would post pictures, but they all come with an address attached. I'm taking my own pictures tomorrow, so we'll see. We'd be giving up space; we would be losing a whole room, plus a utility room. It's got two bedrooms allegedly about the same size as the ones we have now; it has a "dining room" that is tiny, a galley kitchen and a living room; it has a "full bath", and I'm interested to see how they've managed to cram a toilet and a bathtub and a sink in that house in addition to the other rooms. It was built in the 1930s; it has a huge yard, which is great. We'll just have to see. D/B is going with me tomorrow to look at the house; she owns property and has maintained them all her life. If anyone can spot a lemon, it's her.

The benefits would be the mortgage payment is significantly less than our rent is now. We lose a lot of energy (and pay for it) in this apartment because the window seal is broken in most of the rooms; so the living room and Dante's bedroom are always colder than they should be in the winter time. We have central air, but we live over a brick garage, so the bricks act like an oven in the summer time (and oddly don't do the same in winter time, just when we'd need it most!) -- you can run the air, but it hardly matters. By 4:00, it's sweltering in the summer time. You have to go up stairs on either side of the house to get into it, a real pain in the winter time. We'd have a place to call our own that people couldn't jack up the rent on or throw us (and our cats) out of. There would be a cheaper place to stay if the job market proves problematic after El Hijo is done with his PhD. We get to take advantage of the new first time home buyer's tax credit, which would give us cash in hand up to $8000 at tax time (although we wouldn't get that much off of this place).

The cons to buying this little house would be giving up space, first and foremost. While I'm one to stuff myself into a tiny but clean box in order to call it my own, that's me. Dante needs to have enough stomping off in a huff so he can "show us" space. El Hijo needs to feel like he has a place to escape and be all intellectual. I have to have a space to read books and drink tea and pretend I'm a lady detective in Botswana. All these things are critical. Second, there is no air conditioning in the house. It looks like it sits in the shade, and it's not like we've actually gotten the benefit out of our air conditioning in this place (we mostly use fans); but that's a consideration. I think the washer and dryer are in the kitchen. The optimist in me goes "Yay, more 'counter space'!" but the pessimist in me goes "Where the hell do you iron clothes?"

The other problem is that somebody already has an option to buy contract on it -- once her property sells. But, if we came in with an offer the seller liked, the first buyer would have 48 hours to get her financing together or the deal is rejected and ours would be accepted. So, we could even make an offer, be accepted, and we still wouldn't get it. I don't like that. Seems stressful. The good news is we seem to be credit worthy and the loan seems like it's not going to be hard to get (so far). I'm working on getting a preapproval letter from the bank I like (going to try to go with the credit union, if they can give us the best deal), we're looking at the house tomorrow.

And then, if we like (or can tolerate) what we see, we might just make an offer! That's scary and exciting all at once. I'm trying not to get attached to the concept -- although I will admit to having a moment of daydreaming about planting sweet pea all up the lattice work on the sides ...

Anyway, it seems like the choice might be to downsize ourselves and live snugly or to keep renting and just wait out the next few years. It all depends on how snug "snug" really is. I'll know more tomorrow.

If we do decide to proceed, I'm going to call it Casita "Virgil" (insert real last name here). :D

-- DV

Oh, and if you have horror stories, warnings and advice about houses and the purchasing of them, please do tell!

Congratulations!

To Kitush & Huffers, who were supposed to get married today.

I got a beautiful invitation, but the time was "out of joint", as Hamlet would've said, and I could not fly across the pond to attend.

I hope everything went well, I hope it was beautiful, and I'm still selecting my wedding present, which is a hodgepodge of things from my country that I hope the both of you will enjoy. :)

Let me know where to send it.

Congrats again! I expect an emailed pic!!


<3 DV

The Revolutionary Experience of Emily Dickenson

Great name for a band, isn't it? I'm going to put together a band that only covers 80s songs and does it with instruments like the dulcimer. We'll be The Revolutionary Experience of Emily Dickenson, as an ode to both Prince and Jimi Hendrix and the English Department.

An Emily Dickenson poem I like:

Have you got a brook in your little heart,
Where bashful flowers blow,
And blushing birds go down to drink
And shadows tremble so?

And nobody knows, so still it flows,
That any brook is there;
And yet your little draught of life
Is daily drunken there.

Then look out for the little brook in March,
When the rivers overflow,
And the snows come hurrying over the hills,
And the bridges often go.

And later, in August it may be,
When the meadows parching lie,
Beware lest this little brook of life
Some burning noon go dry!




For all those with a little brook in their hearts.

-- DV

Baby Steps Into Activism

This Friday we're reading The Real Rosa Parks (plus two other articles) in class. I like this small article, because it's about the little things that go into making big changes. The article explains the danger of idolizing (essentially) key figures in historical movements, because it gives us the impression that they are somehow in possession of above average ability.

This conventional portrayal suggests that social activists come out of nowhere, to suddenly take dramatic stands. It implies that we act with the greatest impact when we act alone, at least initially. And that change occurs instantly, as opposed to building on a series of often-invisible actions. The myth of Parks as lone activist reinforces a notion that anyone who takes a committed public stand, or at least an effective one, has to be a larger-than-life figure--someone with more time, energy, courage, vision, or knowledge than any normal person could ever possess. This belief pervades our society, in part because the media tends not to represent historical change as the work of ordinary human beings, which it almost always is.

What is more important is realizing all the little things that led up to the big action.

Think again about the different ways one can frame Rosa Parks's historic action. In the prevailing myth, Parks decides to act almost on a whim, in isolation. She's a virgin to politics, a holy innocent. The lesson seems to be that if any of us suddenly got the urge to do something equally heroic, that would be great. Of course most of us don't, so we wait our entire lives to find the ideal moment.

Parks's real story conveys a far more empowering moral. She begins with seemingly modest steps. She goes to a meeting, and then another, helping build the community that in turn supported her path. Hesitant at first, she gains confidence as she speaks out. She keeps on despite a profoundly uncertain context, as she and others act as best they can to challenge deeply entrenched injustices, with little certainty of results. Had she and others given up after her tenth or eleventh year of commitment, we might never have heard of Montgomery.

Parks also reminds us that even in a seemingly losing cause, one person may unknowingly inspire another, and that person yet a third, who may then go on to change the world, or at least a small corner of it. Rosa Parks's husband Raymond convinced her to attend her first NAACP meeting, the initial step on a path that brought her to that fateful day on the bus in Montgomery. But who got Raymond Parks involved? And why did that person take the trouble to do so? What experiences shaped their outlook, forged their convictions? The links in any chain of influence are too numerous, too complex to trace. But being aware that such chains exist, that we can choose to join them, and that lasting change doesn't occur in their absence, is one of the primary ways to sustain hope, especially when our actions seem too insignificant to amount to anything.

Sometimes all the little things you do may not lead to something greater, at least in your lifetime, maybe. But it is the striving that is the important thing. The striving is what inspires people to do something besides watch events unfold around them. Striving gives people a model to follow. It leaves people without an excuse as to what they could be doing. Striving tells people who would take advantage of others that they won't be able to do so without opposition; that if nothing else, someone will point a finger at the problem and direct attention to it.

It is my opinion that being a good citizen means being an engaged citizen. To me, that means being educated and it means being active. It means understanding my part in the issues of my community. It means I don't get the luxury of pretending not to care about the news or yawning about politics, because that makes more work on someone else. It especially means connections and community building to me. I believe in small steps that make small differences. I believe in being conscious.

It is easy for me to get caught up in the minutia of my job and my life and ignore those things that I could do. It's easy to think that my job is enough, since it is in academia and I mentor students who are living on the cusp of changing the life cycle of generations. And maybe it is enough; but it doesn't feel like enough to me.

So I'm going to devote some regular space to reminding myself of the small acts of power that are within my control, things that can make an actual difference. Who knows? Maybe somebody else will be inspired by it, too. :)

-- DV