Author Archives: susanjustwrites

Two thrillers and a mystery

This month I’m primarily focused on trying to publish the nonfiction book I’ve been working on for the last few years.  It tells the story of my fight for reproductive rights when I was a young lawyer in Chicago.  It will be a terrific book.  But I need to find a publisher.

While I pursue this goal, I’ve decided to devote this post to describing my three novels, all stories blending “the law” with protagonists who find themselves in perilous settings but somehow manage to survive.

Please forgive my shameless plug, but I honestly think you’ll enjoy reading about my novels.

My first published novel, A Quicker Blood, takes its title from an Emily Dickinson poem about “escape.”  Dickinson wrote “I never hear the word ‘escape’ without a quicker blood.”  You’re right to conclude that the theme of this thriller is “escape.”

The protagonist, Karen B. Clark, is a young lawyer living in New York City three years after getting her law degree.  She’s already weary of life in NYC, disillusioned with her job on Wall Street, and fed up with her two-timing boyfriend.  (I named my protagonist Karen in honor of a good friend who worked on behalf of needy clients for many years before she died.  I’ve known many admirable women named Karen, and I think it’s deplorable to disparage women using the name Karen for no good reason.)

Karen Clark impulsively takes off for a lawyers’ conference in Chicago, where she meets another young woman named Karen B. Clark.  Karen decides to call her “K.B.”   K.B. has just finished law school and is about begin her legal career in the small town of Walden, Wisconsin, where a law firm has hired her, sight unseen.

When both Karen and K.B. are injured in separate mishaps, Karen awakens in a hospital, where she’s been identified as K.B.  She spies a newspaper report of the death of an unidentified young woman and realizes that K.B. must be dead.

Karen decides to seize the moment and turn her life around.  She’ll escape her life in NYC, assume K.B.’s identity, and try life as a small-town lawyer.  Once in Walden, Karen relishes her new existence and begins a sizzling romance, but she soon uncovers terrible secrets that lead her to fear for her life.

A Quicker Blood has garnered many 5-star customer reviews on Amazon.com.  You might want to read a few of them!  Almost every reader has loved this book and asked me to write another one like it.  I think you’d also love learning how Karen finds her way to Walden and deals with the challenges of assuming someone else’s identity. You’ll probably like reading about the somewhat dubious characters she encounters there, how she finds herself plunged into a perilous situation, and how she cleverly manages to survive.

My second novel, Jealous Mistress, is not a thriller but an old-fashioned mystery like the ones Agatha Christie used to write.  A dead body appears on the first page, so you know that there’s a mystery to be solved.

It’s October 1981, and the Reagan administration has just declared that ketchup is a vegetable.  Alison Ross has chosen to set aside her demanding career as a lawyer so she can spend more time at home with her two young children.  She’d like to find a good part-time job, but because “the law is a jealous mistress,” her search for part-time work has gone nowhere.

Early one morning, Alison stumbles across a dead body at her daughter’s nursery school. (Preschools were still called nursery schools in 1981.)  Because Alison saw the school janitor make a hasty exit, she reluctantly becomes emmeshed in the police investigation.  When the police charge the janitor with murder, Allison has doubts about his guilt and decides to find out what really happened.

Pursuing the real killer while she juggles life at home with her husband and kids, Alison uncovers a host of shocking secrets in the quiet suburb of East Winnette.

Lots of readers have written 5-star customer reviews for this novel, too. It presents issues that many of us have dealt with.  If we’ve had a demanding job before we had kids, how do we achieve work-life balance once we have kids? This may mean deciding whether to keep our full-time jobs or search for part-time work.  In this story, I also ask whether a supportive husband will help his wife solve a mystery that falls into their laps, or will he get fed up with her time-consuming efforts to solve it on her own?  Will the wife, in her search for the killer, find herself attracted to another man who offers to help her?  And how does life in an affluent suburb affect Alison, who’s among its less affluent residents?

I had fun writing this story, which deals with all of these questions.  At the same time, I delved into the time-honored phase, “the law is a jealous mistress.”  What does it mean for lawyers today?  I also liked flirting with the term “jealous mistress” as a term with a double meaning.  If you read Jealous Mistress, you’ll come to your own conclusions.

My third novel, Red Diana, is something of a sequel to A Quicker Blood.  Karen Clark reappears twelve years after we left her at the end of A Quicker Blood.  She has moved to San Francisco with her 8-year-old daughter Davida (called Davi) and loves her new life there.

One terrible day, Davi is abducted on Market Street, just outside the office building where Karen works.  It’s summer and Davi has pleaded with Karen to spend a day at Karen’s office.  After buying M&Ms at a 7-Eleven, Davi is suddenly grabbed by someone wearing a mask, and Karen is gripped by fear.  Davi is returned unharmed the next morning and Karen begins to relax, but she soon finds a threatening note pinned to Davi’s shirt: “Karen, you’re next.”

Karen must find out who grabbed Davi—and why.  Her only clues are Davis’s recall of a brown sofa and the words “Red Diana.”  With the help of SFPD detective Greg Chan, Karen begins her relentless pursuit of the cruel abductor who now threatens her own life.

Set in San Francisco, with flashbacks to Chicago and New York, this chilling psychological thriller explores a bunch of themes: The desire for revenge, the burden of guilt, and the tyranny of unethical lawyers and corrupt judges.  It also touches on the shattering pain of losing a loved one—and the many routes survivors take to deal with their loss.

Above all, the book focuses on the intense love between parent and child–what one psychoanalyst has called “indestructible, the strongest relationship on earth.”

Karen’s search for the abductor leads her to a charming San Francisco Victorian, where she confronts a disturbed killer who puts her life in peril.

Like my other two novels, Red Diana has earned many 5-star reviews, and I think you’ll find it an absorbing read.

To sum up:  Please forgive my shameless plug(s) and think about choosing one of my novels as a better-than-ordinary “beach read” this summer.  You can zip through all three of them pretty fast, and I think you’ll be pleased with the sharp writing style you’ve come to like in my blog posts.

Happy reading!

THE BEEKEEPERS//KEEPING BEES

I’m not a big fan of action films, but I find some of them worth watching.  I recently watched such a film, “The Beekeeper,” starring English actor Jason Statham.  (Hint: TV-viewing is better for almost any film but especially for action films because you can fast-forward through the most harrowing scenes.)  Statham is well known for playing tough characters who don’t shy away from violent behavior if it will benefit good people.

In this film, Statham portrays Adam Clay, a retired government assassin who has changed course and lives a quiet life taking care of his beehives on property owned by kindly Eloise Parker.  Parker falls for a phishing scam that wipes out her savings, leading her to commit suicide. When Clay finds her body, he’s enraged and sets out to seek revenge against those who have caused her death.  The complicated plot involves a group called “The Beekeepers,” but I’ll stop here, adding only that I liked the way the film ended.

One endearing feature of this story is Clay’s devotion to his bees. That kind of devotion leads to a much more serious (and appropriate) story for today, Earth Day:  The threat to our country’s bees.  I recently read a scary update from one of the environmentally-concerned entities I support, Earthjustice.

Earthjustice is concerned with many threats to the earth’s environment, including the human-made biodiversity crisis that is causing the “die-off” of a number of species. One of the most critical is the current threat to honey bees, who pollinate our “superfoods,” foods that are rich in vitamins and nutrients.  Earthjustice warns that without these pollinators, “our nation would lose one-third of its crops as well as our food security.”  But extensive use of pesticides in industrial agriculture has led to massive die-offs of honey bees.  We simply can’t afford to lose them.

Earthjustice, whose slogan is “because the earth needs a good lawyer,” believes that the law is the most powerful tool we have to protect our natural world.  In the case of honey bees, its lawyers are fighting the key drivers of this crisis.  Notably, they recently won a victory in California that prohibits the use of an insecticide, sulfoxaflor. This victory should help to protect bees across the country. 

Earthjustice plans to continue to protect the diversity of plant and animal life on which we all depend.  Let’s support its efforts and those by other hard-working groups committed to preserving our planet, especially the Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC) and the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF).

We can begin by fighting to save our honey bees!

Serbia? Seriously?

How many Americans know anything about Serbia?  My guess? Very few.

I’m one of those very few.  In 2016 I took a Danube River trip with an affable group of fellow travelers.  Halfway through our trip, we made a stop in Bratislava, the charming capital of Slovakia.  [FYI: After Czechoslovakia broke up in 1993, about half of the former Czechoslovakia became the country of Slovakia. The other half became the Czech Republic.]

Our tour left Bratislava and went on to Belgrade, the capital of Serbia. [FYI:  Serbia is one of several smaller countries that formerly made up Yugoslavia.  Even though Yugoslavia broke up in 1992, Serbia didn’t opt for independence until 2006.]

Belgrade turned out to be a surprisingly beautiful and sophisticated city.  As our tour guide led us through the Belgrade Fortress and other tourist sights, I spied an interesting sculpture—that of Nikola Tesla. 

Tesla, the scientist and inventor whose work with electricity rivaled that of his American competitors, Thomas Edison and George Westinghouse, is a celebrated figure in Serbia.  In 1884, he left Europe for America, where he led a complicated life, ending alone in a NYC hotel room with a history of unpaid bills.  Sadly, his formerly-respected name has become anathema to some Americans, thanks to current political developments that Tesla himself had absolutely nothing to do with.

Why talk about Serbia today?  Because its current political situation has become headline news, news seriously worth our attention.

According to the AP, over 100,000 people—maybe as many as 325,000–joined a mass rally in Belgrade last weekend to culminate months-long protests against Serbia’s current President Aleksandar Vucic and his nationalist right-wing-inspired government.  “Large crowds of flag-waving protesters clogged the downtown area…despite occasional rain, with people hardly able to move,” many of them unable to get close to the actual protest venue.

University students have been leading peaceful protests in Serbia for the past four months.  The protests began when the canopy of a railway station collapsed, killing 15 people.  Many blamed the allegedly corrupt builders, allied with the government, as responsible for the canopy’s shoddy construction.

The protests have continued because of fierce opposition to the autocratic government, not merely among students but also among the rest of the Serbian population.  According to a survey reported in The New York Times, only one-third of Serbians approve of President Vucic’s leadership.  As the Financial Times quoted one protest leader, “it is time for this regime to end.”

On Wednesday, March 19, the protests had a demonstrable impact, forcing Prime Minister Milos Vucevic, an ally of President Vucic, to resign, giving the President 30 days to choose a new Prime Minister.

Without elaborating further on Serbian politics, I’ll close with this:  It’s heartening to see young people rise up to protest what they view as corrupt and destructive behavior by their government’s leaders.  Here in the U.S., I’m heartened to see that both young and older citizens have begun to stand up against the current leadership of our own government.  Recent town halls held in a number of congressional districts have highlighted the outspoken protest by those who’ve shown up.  

I hope we don’t have to wait for the 2026 midterm elections to change things.  Some special elections, like the Supreme Court fight in Wisconsin, loom in the next few weeks. 

Let’s fight for the survival of our democracy.  Let’s lend our support to current leaders who have earned it.  Let’s support new leaders who will continue the fight for democracy.  I’m doing what I can to support them, and I hope that you will, too.

Let’s be scent-sible

While I try to ignore the stench dominating the news from our nation’s capital, I’ve decided to focus on some of the more positive scents that dominate in the rest of our world. 

Here’s a story about “scents” I came across in the winter issue of National Parks, a magazine devoted to protecting America’s national parks and public lands.

Author Maggie Downs likes to hike through our now-sadly-endangered national parks, beginning her story with a hike through Arches National Park, where “the air is alive” with scents like the crisp aroma of pines and junipers.  She notes that these scents are different from those in Joshua Tree National Park, where desert aromas permeate the air.

Downs goes on to describe the scents that connect her to each destination she explores, highlighting the significance of scents.  Flowers, for example, rely on fragrance to lure pollinators, while predators like wolves use scent to mark territories, find mates, and track prey.

But Downs worries that many national park “scentscapes” are under threat because of climate change and pollution.  Although we have long treasured our parks for their beauty and their quiet, their “vital aromas” haven’t gotten the same level of protection.   

Will Rice, a professor at the University of Montana, has studied how natural smells are increasingly relevant to tourists in our national parks.  These natural smells “play a key role in what grounds us to a place,” he says.  “Scent…plays a role” in visitors’ strong attachment to the parks,” he adds.  “National parks are places where you can smell natural smells, and that’s increasingly difficult [to find] in a developing and industrial world.”

Maggie Downs adds, “Unfortunately, climate change is already affecting scentscapes…. It threatens native plant species with drought and wildfires, and it disrupts blooming scents, which throws plants and pollinators out of sync.”  She notes that “flowering plants are losing their fragrance,” and air pollution can mask natural scents.

We can’t be sure about the future impact of climate change and pollution, but we should try to protect nature’s smells while we still can.  Will Rice suggests that legislation can help.  The Marine Mammal Protection Act helped seals make a comeback in Cape Cod.  Their return has restored their scent along the beach, a scent Thoreau smelled when he walked up the Cape Cod coast.  And while that smell disappeared for a long time, it has now happily rebounded.

So let’s be scent-sible and protect the natural scents that still surround us.  As I often say (with no originality whatsoever), “Better late than never.”

All the Presidents’ Men: an update

A few weeks ago, I plucked an old movie from my TV playlist and re-watched the 1976 award-winning film, “All the Presidents’ Men.”   I found it not only the riveting film I remembered but also a remarkably relevant film to watch right now. 

In this fast-moving story of two intrepid journalists working at The Washington Post in 1972, the media world at that time gradually became aware of what became known as “Watergate.”  Although President Richard Nixon had a commanding lead in the polls and was about to be reelected in a landslide in November 1972, his sense of insecurity and inferiority led him, along with his cronies, to sponsor a break-in of Democratic Party headquarters in the Watergate office building in June 1972.  The break-in was less than totally successful.  Moronic criminal-types made a couple of foolish errors that led to the detection of the break-in and their arrest by DC police.

At The Post, the two young journalists, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, faced innumerable obstacles as they tried to ferret out the truth of exactly what had happened and why.  The story ultimately focused on WHO:  Who were the players in the Nixon administration who were pulling the strings behind the Watergate break-in? 

To see the whole story play out, you may want to watch the film yourself.  But whether you watch it or not, please keep in mind just how relevant it is today.

Watergate was only one of the “dirty tricks” Nixon and his cohorts employed to undermine his political opponents.  On January 20, a president demonstrably worse than Nixon was inaugurated.  After a campaign replete with disinformation, he has already begun to effect enormous change in our country.  More than ever, we need brave and intrepid journalists like Woodward and Bernstein to ferret out the truth behind any possible wrongdoing.

The role of The Washington Post is central in both eras.  In 1972, Woodward and Bernstein had to persuade their reluctant editor at The Post to support them as they pursued the truth.  He finally relented and allowed them to publish their findings.  But if they had faltered in the face of opposition, the truth may never have come out.

In 2025, journalists at The Post have taken a different route.  A popular columnist, Jennifer Rubin, loudly spoke out against her editors and her publisher, Jeff Bezos, whom she saw as kowtowing to the incoming administration.  She and her colleagues decided to quit working at The Post, proclaiming that it was no longer seeking the truth.  On January 20, she wrote:

“The American people certainly will not be front and center at Trump’s inauguration. It’s all about him and his billionaire cronies, including the media owners who have buckled to his will. ‘Big-name billionaires are lining up to strengthen their relationships with incoming President Donald Trump during next week’s inauguration festivities,” Forbes reported.  When you add in [others] whose combined wealth dwarfs many countries’ GDP’s—you get a vivid tableau of the new oligarchy. We usher into office today a government of, by, and for the billionaires.” 

Rubin and other like-minded journalists decided to create a new entity, The Contrarian.  Norm Eisen explained how it started:

“Jen and I agreed to launch [this] venture, rounding up…over two dozen contributors in a matter of days.  We kicked off with … Jen’s Post resignation letter. While we had high hopes, we never could’ve imagined what happened next. A quarter of a million subscribers poured in … And the engagement was through the roof, with over 1,000,000 views per day.” 

Rubin proclaimed that the new venture hoped to be “a…space where independence is non-negotiable. Here, you won’t find cozy alliances, half-measures, or false equivalences. We bend the knee to no one, vigorously challenge unchecked authority, and champion transparency and accountability.  In a nation awash with noise and growing disinformation, The Contrarian cuts through the static to deliver sharp, uncompromising insights…. Our loyalty is to … the truth, and to our democratic ideals—many of which are currently under threat.”

I’ve signed up to get The Contrarian delivered to my inbox.  I hope it will stick to its commitment to the truth.  But I haven’t given up on the “legacy media”–mainstream publications like The Washington Post, The New York Times, the San Francisco Chronicle, and the San Francisco Standard.  All of them still land in my inbox every day.  (I also watch TV news programming when it appears to report the news fairly.)  I think that all of these publications include at least a few brave journalists, like the now-legendary Woodward and Bernstein, still searching for the truth, still speaking out to report wrongdoing in DC or elsewhere. 

I’ll be watching to make sure they don’t falter, hoping that, despite editors and publishers who may stand in their way, they’ll continue to live up to their role as journalists and tell their readers the truth.

Those tempting holiday treats

December means one delicious holiday treat after another.  We’re all tempted to indulge.  But before you start munching, you might want to know the results of a couple of studies related to those holiday sweets.

First, if you love chocolate, you may already be aware of the virtues of dark chocolate.  But an important new study has just confirmed that only dark chocolate is associated with lowering the risk of developing diabetes.  This 30-year-long study, conducted at the Harvard Chan School Department of Nutrition, focused on almost 200,000 people who started out free of diabetes. When the study ended, nearly 20,000 had been diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes. A lot of them reported specifically on their dark and milk chocolate intake.

It’s interesting, first of all, that those who ate at least 5 ounces of any kind of chocolate had a 10% lower risk of developing T2 diabetes than people who rarely or never ate chocolate.  But significantly, dark chocolate had a much bigger impact than milk chocolate.  Participants who ate dark chocolate had a 21% lower risk, with a 3% reduction in risk for every serving of dark chocolate eaten in a week.

At the same time, milk chocolate was NOT associated with reduced risk even though it has a similar level of calories and saturated fat.  Why?  According to the researchers, it’s the polyphenols in dark chocolate that may offset the effects of fat and sugar.

So before you bite into a mouthwatering chocolate dessert, try to find one made of dark chocolate.  I’ve been sampling some new dark chocolate candy bars, and they’re delicious.  It’s really no great hardship to switch from milk chocolate to dark.

You might also want to know about new research into one feature of the sweets we love:  their frequent dependence on high-fructose corn syrup.

Scientists at Washington University in St. Louis have found that dietary fructose promotes the tumor growth of certain cancers in animal models.  The finding in this study, published December 4 in the journal Nature, could open up new avenues for care and treatment of many types of cancer.

“The idea that you can tackle cancer with diet is intriguing,” said Gary Patti, a professor of chemistry, genetics, and medicine at the WashU School of Medicine.  The culprit seems to be fructose, which is similar to glucose.  Both are types of sugar, but the body seems to metabolize them differently.  Both are found naturally in fruits, vegetables, dairy products, and grains, and both are added as sweeteners in many processed foods. But the food industry has favored fructose because it’s sweeter. 

Consumption of fructose has escalated dramatically since the 1960s, and Patti pointed out that the number of items in your pantry that contain high-fructose corn syrup, the most common form of fructose, is “pretty astonishing.”  “Almost everything has it,” he added.  This includes foods like pasta sauce, salad dressing, and ketchup.  “Unless you actively seek to avoid it, it’s probably part of your diet.”

The problem is that fructose apparently impacts the growth of tumors.  I’ll skip the technical stuff, but what’s important is that we should avoid dietary fructose as much as we can.  While investigators at WashU Medicine and elsewhere around the world continue to look into possible connections between the surge in fructose consumption and the increasing prevalence of cancers among people under the age of 50, let’s try to avoid this problem.

Here’s my advice:  If you plan to indulge in some yummy holiday treats, try to find those made with dark chocolate and those that don’t include high-fructose corn syrup.  If you can.

Happy holidays!

JFK

Today is November 22, a day forever marked by an American tragedy.  On this day in 1963, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas.

As a young kid, I was inspired by Kennedy’s appearance in my world when the media focused on his candidacy for the vice-presidential nomination at the 1956 Democratic Convention.  A vivid contrast to Presidents Truman and Eisenhower, he was a youthful and vigorous U.S. Senator who advocated positive changes in our country.  Along with many others in my generation, the emergence of JFK on the political scene intensified my interest in American politics.  Later that year, my sister gave me a copy of “Profiles in Courage,” Kennedy’s book about political heroes in American history.  I treasured that book and eagerly read and re-read it.  Over the years, I’ve continued to collect books about JFK.  My collection includes my original copy of “Profiles in Courage.”

After his election as President in 1960, Kennedy continued to inspire me.  And on June 11, 1963, he spoke out in favor of equal justice for all Americans.  I had returned to my home in Chicago after my college graduation at WashU in time to watch the televised speech he gave that day.

JFK began by noting Alabama Governor George Wallace‘s refusal, despite a court order, to allow the admission of two Black students to the University of Alabama.  He went on to say that “difficulties over segregation and discrimination exist in every city, in every State of the Union, producing in many cities a rising tide of discontent that threatens the public safety.”  This statement, and others, were important.  But I was mainly moved by these words: “The heart of the question is whether all Americans are to be afforded equal rights and equal opportunities, whether we are going to treat our fellow Americans as we want to be treated.”  After noting the special problem of racial discrimination, he added: “[T]his Nation, for all its hopes and all its boasts, will not be fully free until all its citizens are free.”

He said he planned to ask Congress to enact legislation giving all Americans “the right to be served in facilities…open to the public,” including hotels and restaurants, and to authorize the federal government “to participate more fully in lawsuits designed to end segregation in public education” and “greater protection for the right to vote.”  (His efforts eventually led to the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.)  He closed by asking for “the support of all our citizens.”

I sat transfixed in front of the TV, totally in awe of this speech, and I became an ardent supporter of the same ideals. 

Thanks to JFK, as a young person I developed a consuming interest in politics, and I began to think about a future where I could be involved in politics in some way.  One possible path occurred to me:  Attending law school and becoming a lawyer.  As I wrote in my handwritten journal in 1958, “I have developed a keen interest in law, and at the moment, I am busily planning to study law if possible.  At one time I believed I would be a writer….  Now, law and politics beckon, and…I am trying to convince myself that nothing is impossible and that if I want it badly enough, I will get it!”  Still a teenager, I wasn’t ready to make the leap to law school, but I did look forward to a future somehow focused on government and politics.  So I majored in political science in college and went on to be a graduate student in that field before abandoning it in favor of law school.

JFK’s assassination on November 22, 1963, traumatized me and probably most other Americans at the time.  It was truly shocking.  Looking back, I realize just how much it affected me.  As I wrote in my handwritten journal on the day after he was assassinated: “When the news of [his] death … was announced, I was too stunned to cry, too horrified to do much of anything but say the words echoed over and over by seemingly everyone…. I can’t believe it!  It’s incredible!  How could anyone do such a thing? And why?”  I added: “I was mourning the personal loss of an individual who had brought such vigor, such excitement, such brilliance, such intelligence, such energy…to everything he ever did in his life.  [He] was a personal icon to me, a hero, a leader to follow…who has always stood, in my eyes, for everything that was right in politics and government, and in the pursuit of power for noble aims, and who, I am certain, played a large part in motivating me…toward a life in politics and government for myself.  The result is perhaps a ‘new’ resolve…my resolve to dedicate my own life, as [he] dedicated his, to what is not always the easiest but what will surely be the most rewarding for me…a life of devoted public service to my country.  If I can, I will pursue legal studies for the next three years to prepare me [or else immediately devote] myself to the ideals of hard work and sacrifice in the public interest.” 

I’d grown up in an era when political assassinations happened only in “banana republics.”  Seeing a young, vital, and inspiring political leader like JFK cruelly shot down changed forever my view of America as a place where political transitions always occur peacefully.  The later assassinations of other American leaders (like Martin Luther King, Jr., and RFK) further traumatized me and others in our country. 

But although I lost him as our president, JFK had motivated me to pursue the study of American politics as well as the study of law.  At a pivotal moment, I chose to leave academia with the goal of becoming an activist via the study of law.  

After graduating from law school, I did become an activist.  I was in the vanguard of lawyers who fought to secure women’s reproductive rights.  My co-counsel and I won a hard-fought victory, invalidating the restrictive Illinois abortion statute in 1971 (Doe v. Scott, 321 F.Supp. 1385 (N.D.Ill. 1971).  As part of that lawsuit, I represented a Black teenage rape victim, winning a TRO in the appellate court that enabled her to have a legal abortion in March 1970.  This lawsuit is the focus of my forthcoming book, tentatively titled On the Barricades.

Throughout my life and my varied career, I’ve maintained my enormous interest in politics, government, and law.  Although I now view myself primarily as a writer, I continue to enthusiastically follow all of that today, whether current trends align with my personal views or not.

I will forever be indebted to JFK for inspiring me to follow this path.

Polls 2024

Are you fed up with polls?  I am.

I’m mad that every time I turn on TV news, I’m confronted with one poll after another.  The media seem obsessed with them, perhaps because they’re desperately trying to come up with fresh stories to fill their nearly endless need to offer viewers something new and different.

I’ve always been leery of polls.  First, I’ve never been asked to be in any poll, and no one I know has either. I’ve always wondered exactly who are the people answering questions in these polls.  Currently, polls seem to be focusing on voters in “swing states” and voters in one demographic group or another.  Maybe I don’t fit into any of those categories.  But I think my views on any number of issues are valuable and should somehow be included in these polls.  Why aren’t they?

Further, I’m quite certain that the people who do participate are often led to answer questions in a given way, thanks to questions that are, in my view, slanted in one direction or another. You’ve probably noticed that, too.

Instead of getting mad, maybe I should take the advice of Ezra Klein, an opinion writer for The New York Times.  On October 13, he published a column, “Ignore the Polls.”  He makes a bunch of good points.  To begin with, he notes that you’re probably looking at polls to know who’ll win.  But the polls can’t tell you that.  On average, polls in every presidential election between 1969 and 2012 were off by two percentage points.  More recent polls, in 2016 and 2020, were off by even more.  Klein states that pollsters today are desperate to avoid the mistakes they made in 2016 and 2020, when they undercounted Trump supporters.  So some of them are asking voters to recall who they voted for in 2020 and then using that info to include Trump voters more accurately this time.  But the results are very different when pollsters don’t ask voters to recall what they did in the past.  According to Klein, voters are “notoriously bad at recalling past votes.”  So why do the pollsters even bother asking?

Klein adds that polls are “remarkably, eerily stable.”  Events keep happening (like assassination attempts and televised debates), but the polls haven’t really changed.  So Klein advises us to give ourselves a break.  “Step off the emotional roller coaster.  If you want to do something to affect the election, donate money or time in a swing state…or volunteer in a local race.  Call anyone in your life who might actually be undecided or might not be registered to vote or might not make it to the polls.  And then let it go.” 

That’s exactly what I’ve been doing.  I’m glad my outlook resembles Ezra Klein’s.  Now if the media would just pay attention to his wise advice.  Hey, media people, ignore the polls.  Instead, seek out interesting stories about the candidates, the voters, and the issues.  Then let it go

Cynicism can be bad for your health

Hey, it’s easy to be cynical these days. 

We’re faced with lie-spouting politicians threatening democratic rule in our country.  We’re confronted by incompetent jerks who make countless mistakes, or even try to scam us, at almost any business we patronize.  And I can’t forget the maniac drivers who weave from lane to lane at illegally high speeds, threatening to kill us every time we’re near them on the freeway. 

But hold on a minute.  A social scientist/author says that having a cynical worldview isn’t such a great idea.  Jamil Zaki wants you to know that having a cynical worldview may have a negative effect on your health. 

In his new book, “Hope for Cynics:  The Surprising Science of Human Goodness,” Zaki concedes that being a cynic can make us feel safer and smarter than the selfish, greedy, and dishonest people in our midst.  But his research at Stanford (where he’s the director of its Social Neuroscience Lab) suggests that it’s much better to become “hopeful skeptics.”  In other words, it’s okay to be critical of troublemakers, but you should also recognize how kind and generous most people really are.

What’s at play here?  Well, we tend to pay more attention to negative events than to positive ones.  This “negativity bias” leads you to remember an occasional driver who cuts you off in traffic while you ignore the countless drivers who are obeying the rules of the road.  Zaki says we should take 15 minutes out of our day and pay attention to the kindness all around us instead of the rudeness you encounter now and then.

Similarly, he recommends that we spread “positive gossip,” pointing out good deeds and kind behavior instead of doing the opposite–spreading mean-spirited gossip about people we dislike.

What’s the benefit of avoiding cynical thought?  You’ll probably feel better about humankind, and that will probably lead to better health.  According to Zaki, the cynical among us are more likely to suffer from depression, heart disease, and feeling burned out.

In the midst of a heated campaign for mayor in San Francisco, one candidate has asked voters to end “the era of cynicism.”  He’s a political novice who has spent much of his personal fortune on philanthropic efforts aimed at improving life in our city, and he’s angry that his opponents have belittled those efforts.  I don’t blame him one bit.  Even though his philanthropy hasn’t always met its goals, the other candidates shouldn’t stoop to cynical bashing.  Instead of criticizing him (as they did in a recent televised debate), they could be praising his attempts to make life better. They could adopt a positive approach and advocate their own ideas for achieving worthwhile goals for our city.  Sadly, the negativity hurled during the debate was so awful that I immediately stopped watching.

As The New York Times book review of Zaki’s book has warned: “Don’t Fall into the ‘Cynicism Trap.”  I don’t plan to, and I hope you won’t either.  Let’s aim for hopeful skepticism.  If we avoid cynicism and instead pay more attention to the kindness around us, we just might feel better.

Watching a new musical on Broadway 50-plus years ago

   

In April 1973, my husband (I’ll call him Marv) and I left our home in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and headed for New York City.  Marv was a terrific math professor at the University of Michigan, and he’d already earned tenure there.  Thanks to recognition by other mathematicians, he was invited to speak at a math conference to be held at NYC’s famed Biltmore Hotel, and I decided to tag along.

A bunch of my law-school classmates were living in NYC just then, and I contacted a few of them about getting together while Marv and I were in town.  One of my favorite classmates was my close friend Arlene, and she immediately made plans to see both of us one evening during our stay.

I was thrilled when Arlene surprised me with a terrific plan.  She was purchasing tickets for all three of us to see a hit musical playing on Broadway.  I’ve always been a huge fan of Broadway musicals, beginning when I was a kid, and I was excited at the prospect of seeing this one.  I may have heard something about it even before we got to NYC, but I didn’t know any details.  In the pre-internet era, it was hard to get details like that.

After a scrumptious dinner somewhere in Manhattan, the three of us set out for Broadway and the musical Arlene had chosen.  We excitedly took our seats in the balcony as the lights dimmed and a hush fell over the audience

As the curtain rose, I gasped. The musical was “Grease,” and it began at a 1950s class reunion at a Chicago public high school.  The graduation year, prominently displayed on the stage, was the same year that Marv and I had graduated from our own public high schools!  As we watched, our mouths agape, we soon figured out that the story focused on the “greasers” at the high school one of its writers attended.

The parallel with our own lives was undeniable.  No, we hadn’t attended schools where “greasers” dominated, but I clearly recalled the students my friends and I jokingly called “hoods”—short for “hoodlums.”  These kids were not terribly different from the working-class teenagers in “Grease.”  My school was dominated by middle-class kids, not the “hoods,” but we were all keenly aware of each other.

It turned out that the musical was first produced in Chicago in 1971, when Marv and I were living in California and totally unaware of local theater in Chicago.  It finally landed in NYC in 1972, about a year before we saw it, and it became the enduring hit we all know. Even better known: The 1978 film version that became a worldwide sensation.  “Grease” went on to earn both Broadway and movie fandom.

The music in the Broadway show we saw that night was astounding:  It borrowed the sounds of early rock-and-roll hits that Marv and I knew and loved.  It’s not surprising that many of the songs in “Grease” remain popular today. 

When the curtain finally came down, the three of us looked at each other.  We had all shared that era in the ‘50s just portrayed on the stage.  I was in a state of shock, trying to recover from the profound experience of reliving a slice of life from our high school days. 

You know what?  I don’t think I’ve ever completely recovered.