Women deserve better from the CBC than to be told their “bad attitude” can give them cancer

I rarely catch White Coat, Black Art, but I was intrigued by the subject of the January 19th program “After breast cancer and failed reconstruction, this mom found beauty by going flat”, which I listened to recently. 

Like most middle-aged people, I'm no stranger to cancer: in November, I accompanied a close relative to her second lumpectomy (and associated follow-up treatment), my aunt died of breast cancer nearly a decade ago, my mother-in-law died of breast cancer in 1980 (~12 years post-mastectomy, no reconstruction), and a friend who had reconstructive surgery post-mastectomy is experiencing post-surgical infection and necrosis. And that’s just the breast cancer stories.

What surprised me was the program’s attempt to balance the terrible experience of Joanna Rankin, who describes being bullied into reconstructive surgery in Toronto (frankly, needing a double mastectomy at 32 means reconstruction was not her greatest worry) with the pro-reconstruction attitude of the “expert” interviewed by Dr. Brian Goldman on the program, Dr. Angel Arnaout, breast cancer surgeon and Ottawa region director of breast surgical oncology.

Basically, Arnaout said being happy and well-adjusted after breast cancer surgery reduces the chances of cancer recurrence. Which is misinformation, coming from a layman, but flat out shocking when delivered by a breast cancer specialist. 

Between approximately 21:23 and 22:25 of the recording. Dr. Arnaout says:

The reason [for encouraging immediate breast reconstruction] is because there is a lot of evidence now, especially in breast cancer, that your psychological emotions and your outlook on life is a very strong predictor of how well you will do from cancer, prognosis-wise. And that linkage of how you feel about yourself and therefore how confident you are and how well you present yourself and integrate yourself back into a normal life, and breast reconstruction is supposed to help with easing you back into a normal life and getting out there and doing exercise and being happy. All of it is linked in a lot of studies to your survivorship and your prognosis from a cancer point of view. There is a lot of evidence to show that if you are happier and you’re exercising, because you’re happier you’re taking care of your body and you’re eating well, all those things reduce your chances of recurrence. And so having the option of breast cancer reconstruction is actually now considered part of cancer treatment.

In this rambling, slightly incoherent paragraph, Dr. Arnaout is actually saying that how a patient/survivor feels about herself will directly influence cancer recurrence and "survivorship". Now, this is a wonderful thing to believe (especially if you’re a cancer patient/survivor or surgeon) but unfortunately, it’s not true. Which makes it gobsmacking to have been uttered on CBC, and by an oncology specialist to boot. That Goldman has no problem accepting this proposition is equally staggering.

Because the corollary is: if you don’t feel good about yourself or you don’t have "a good attitude", you’re bringing the cancer (or recurrence) on yourself.

This is known as blaming the victim.

This isn’t just my opinion. The American Cancer Society website goes to great lengths to dispel these antiquated notions, on their page on “Attitude and Cancer”:

Treatment that deals with our emotions and relationships (sometimes called psychosocial interventions) can help people with cancer feel more upbeat and have a better quality of life. But there’s no good evidence to support the idea that these interventions can reduce the risk of cancer, keep cancer from coming back, or help the person with cancer live longer.

Further down that page, in a section on “Personality Traits and Cancer”, they go on:

For many years there have been those who were convinced that people with certain personality types were more likely to get cancer. The common thought was that neurotic people and introverts were at the highest risk of cancer. Along with that, some believed that personality affected the outcome of cancer – the likelihood that a person with cancer might die….In 2010, the largest and best-designed scientific study to date [on the question] was published. It looked at nearly 60,000 people, who were followed over time for a minimum of 30 years. This careful study controlled for smoking, alcohol use, and other known cancer risk factors. The study showed no link between personality and overall cancer risk. There was also no link between personality traits and cancer survival.

Finally, in a section titled “Does a positive attitude affect cancer?”, they write:

…many people want to believe that the power of the mind can control serious diseases. This is a comforting belief that can make a person feel safer from the risk of serious illness. If it were true, you could use your mind to stop the cancer from growing. But the down side of such beliefs is that when people with cancer don’t do well, they may blame themselves. To learn more about attitude and survival, researchers looked at the emotional well-being of more than 1,000 patients with head and neck cancer to find out whether it affected survival. Over time, those who scored high on emotional well-being showed no differences in cancer growth or length of life when compared with those with low scores. Based on what we know now about how cancer starts and grows, there’s no reason to believe that emotions can cause cancer or help it grow.

At Mayo Clinic.org, one finds, in a section on cancer myth-busting, the following:

Myth: A positive attitude is all you need to beat cancer

Truth: There’s no scientific proof that a positive attitude gives you an advantage in cancer treatment or improves your chance of being cured. 

Huge sums are no doubt being spent in the public system to provide reconstruction to mastectomy patients. Joanna Rankin’s story is that some women are bullied into accepting it. Maybe CBC journalists should be investigating that, and whether many/most oncology specialists have confused quality of life issues with the science of recurrence.

CBC Journalistic Practices related to Science and Health read, in part, “In matters of human health we will take particular care to avoid arousing unfounded hopes or fears in persons living with or close to those living with serious illnesses.”

Given the above, I would like Drs. Goldman and/or Arnaout to provide evidence for the notion they are putting forward: that breast reconstruction (and “a good attitude”) results in lower breast cancer recurrence rates.

And, if they cannot, I would expect the program to be corrected or pulled, and an apology to be prominently published on the White Coat, Black Art website.

Because people with cancer, and those who love them, deserve better from the CBC than to be told that their sadness, anger, or other “bad attitude” can give them cancer.

Galloway's fitness for UBC position questionable by 2015

Much of CanLit has been in a tizzy the past couple of weeks, fulminating over issues surrounding Steven Galloway's suspension—later dismissal, without severance--from his post as head of creative writing at the University of British Columbia.* According to media reports, complainants accused Galloway of sexual assault, sexual harassment, inappropriate behaviour, threats, favouritism, and bullying. 

The dismissal followed a months-long investigation by former BC Supreme Court judge Mary Ellen Boyd. Though not all complaints were deemed founded, UBC’s then-president Martha Piper met with Galloway, considered the dean's recommendation and Boyd’s findings, and concluded “a record of misconduct” existed “that resulted in an irreparable breach of the trust placed in faculty members by the university, its students and the general public.”

In other words, he comported himself in a manner unbefitting a UBC professor.

In the hysteria following the UBC Accountable letter, an earlier incident demonstrating Galloway’s unfitness for his position appears to have been forgotten. I was hardly surprised, nearly two years later, to hear he’d been suspended and subsequently fired.

As Maya Angelou said, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.”

After Raziel Reid’s When Everything Feels Like the Movies won the $25,000 Governor General Literary Award for Children’s Literature (Text) in 2014, some voiced their concern the book was inappropriate for young adults; so inappropriate, they petitioned the Canada Council to reconsider the award. Prominent early critics of the book were award winning author Kathy Clark (first signatory of the petition) and columnist and author Barbara Kay.

What were Clark and Kay objecting to? A boatload of vulgar words, deeds, and images—a crack pipe cum anal dildo, masturbation by crucifix, anal sex, deathless prose (“His thick eyelashes were so dark that it looked like he bought them at the drugstore…I fantasized about gluing them on his eyes and then ripping them off when he climaxed”, juicy lips that look “like she had just sucked on a tampon”)--with pervasive cynicism and hopelessness the cherry on top. There’s little doubt Reid set out to ignite a minor Mapplethorpian sensation. Which he got. Clark declared:

I am a strong supporter of the freedom of speech and the petition does not suggest censoring the book. It states that this is not quality literature and should not be rewarded as such. Raziel Reid is free to write what he wants, and I actually commend him for his intentions…

Did WEFLTM really qualify as YA lit? Even CBC didn’t seem to think so, assigning it to the adult Canada Reads competition.

But if one thought it was undeserving of an award, what could be more Canadian than starting a petition in protest? Is it different from writing a letter protesting a university’s handling of a personnel matter?

Reasonable people can differ in their opinion of whether a book merits a children's literature award or YA designation. But Galloway's rejoinder to Clark was anything but reasonable:

I am writing to let you know that your attack of [sic] a fellow writer is disgusting. You may not agree with the content of his book, but if you don't value free speech and think that transgendered [sic] youth have a place in literature, and if you don't understand that your viewpoint is not absolute and privileged above other voices, then you don't deserve to call yourself a writer... here in Canada we don't censor literature...I am ashamed of you, and ashamed to share a profession with you. [Facebook]

Elsewhere, he mentioned that writers he’d spoken with shared “a mixture of support for [Raziel Reid], the desire to forcibly extract Ms. Kay and Ms. Clark’s heads from their rectums, and shame that we are actually having to have a freedom of expression debate in 2015.”

Was this grab bag of insults the way a mature adult handles a difference of opinion? Hardly. This was the hyperbolic language of the social justice warrior, a twining of bullying and ad hominem attack. This was Steven Galloway as pitbull, demonstrating beyond a reasonable doubt that UBC erred in elevating him to head of creative writing.

Where is the moderation one should expect of a professor and university leader? Where, even, is an understanding of the term “censorship,” which could reasonably be expected of a person in his position?

Censorship, as I imagine most thinking people comprehend it, arises when those in authority withdraw a book from publication, remove it from schools or libraries, burn it, or otherwise prevent people from reading it. Only a fanatical ideologue imagines petitioning a granting agency to reconsider an award to be censorship.

In a lengthy** public Facebook conversation with me on January 29^th, 2015, Galloway finally accepted Clark, Kay, and the petitioners, in his words, “have a right to voice their dislike of the book. They also have a right to ask the [Canada Council] to revoke the prize.”

What Galloway would not reconsider was his essential position: disgust and attack. He again assaulted Clark and Kay’s “privilege,” calling them “a couple of elderly women who have no real standing in the world outside of a small, insular bubble,” accusing Kay of “delusion bordering on psychopathy,” and capped his remarks to her with: “You have a newspaper column. I or any one of a number of other people I will see this week could also have such a thing with one phone call. We wouldn't even need our son to be on the editorial board.”

In sum, my contention is that Steven Galloway’s racist, sexist, and ageist insults over the Reid book protest revealed that by 2015, he was clearly unfit to head a university department. Given his propensity for shooting off his mouth, I suspected his dismissal was only a matter of time. Seeded from his own nature.

Read all about it in the dictionary, under the word “hubris.”

----------

Notes:

* The university may have erred in implying they suspected sexual assault. However, given the recent history of events on campus (see here and here), perhaps they were finally attempting to put protecting potential victims first. What would you have them do when an illustrious professor was accused in this way? The complainants must have been pretty credible, to merit the independent inquiry that followed. 

**My pdf transcript runs to 17 pages.

On Censorship: Raziel Reid, Steven Galloway, and the Teachable Moment

Before you go accusing people of censorship, you should know what it means. And when someone admits, after the fact, that he actually doesn't know the definition of the word--and he is acting director of one of the country’s most prominent creative writing programs—perhaps he should consider a new line of work.

The kerfuffle over the latest $25,000 Governor General Literary Award winner for children’s (text), When Everything Feels Like the Movies by Raziel Reid, illustrates a serious deficiency among Canada’s literati: despite the recent lessons of Charlie Hebdo, they apparently do not understand the definition of censorship. And perhaps even what “strong anti-gay sentiment” is. 

With its boatload of vulgar words, deeds, and images—a crack pipe doubles as an anal dildo, masturbation by crucifix, immortal lines like “His thick eyelashes were so dark that it looked like he bought them at the drugstore…I fantasized about gluing them on his eyes and then ripping them off when he climaxed,” or juicy lips that look “like she had just sucked on a tampon”--not to mention its pervasive cynicism and hopelessness--there’s little doubt Reid set out to ignite a minor Mapplethorpian sensation.

Well, he got it. It started with an article by Barbara Kay, the Montreal-based National Post opinion writer of a certain age; the headline says it all: “Wasted tax dollars on a values-void novel”.

After that came criticism by Kathy Clark, an Ontario children’s writer who objected to the book’s vulgarity. A petition to the Canada Council to rescind the prize was created, with Clark the first signatory.

“I am a strong supporter of the freedom of speech and the petition does not suggest censoring the book,” Clark said. “It states that this is not quality literature and should not be rewarded as such. Raziel Reid is free to write what he wants, and I actually commend him for his intentions…in writing the book. It is the manner in which those intentions are carried out and expressed for a young audience that is at issue here.”

Reaction was swift and scathing. Vancouver writer and international bestseller Steven Galloway (The Cellist of Sarajevo, The Confabulist) attacked Clark on social media, calling her position

“disgusting…If you don’t value free speech . . . then you don’t deserve to call yourself a writer…I am ashamed of you and ashamed to share a profession with you.” 

The statement has over 400 Facebook “likes.”

Incredible: Galloway, acting head of UBC’s creative writing program—and 400 of his like-minded, ostensibly freedom loving comrades--consider a petition to be censorship, an attack on freedom of speech.

Sorry, but NOT.

Here is the Canadian Oxford Dictionary (2004) on the subject (they define the noun, not the adverb):

Censor. noun. 1. an official authorized to examine printed matter, films, news, etc., before public release, and to suppress any parts on the grounds of obscenity, threats to security, etc. 2. Rom. hist. [means Roman History?] either of two annual magistrates responsible for holding censuses and empowered to supervise public morals. 3. Psych. an impulse which is said to prevent certain ideas and memories from emerging into consciousness.

So there you have it: censorship takes place when authorities—ie. those with real power-- issue fatwas, demand a book be withdrawn, remove it from schools/libraries, burn or otherwise prevent people from reading it. It would be censorship if Mr. Harper's Minister of literature turned around and said, “Take that sucker off the shelves. No one's gonna read about tampon lollipops on my watch!”  

No matter how hard Galloway et al. twists it, a petition to the Canada Council to reconsider an award just doesn’t qualifies as censorship in the real world. Just to be clear, despite his many other failings, Mr. Harper, of course does not have a Minister of literature.

In these “Je suis Charlie” times, how can Galloway possibly consider a petition censorship? In a long discussion cum argument on my Facebook page over the past 10 days—where he finally admitted that dissenters to a decision have the right of appeal (ie. that the petition is part of our right to free speech and dissent), Galloway wrote this (among other ageist and insulting comments) to Barbara Kay:

You have a newspaper column. I or any one of a number of other people I will see this week could also have such a thing with one phone call. We wouldn't even need our son to be on the editorial board…Asking the Canada Council to rescind a prize for the first time in its history because it has sexual content that you and others find distasteful is so retrograde it almost baffles the mind. You don't think it's harmful, but you're approaching this from the position of an entitled, privileged white woman who has a platform to have a voice in the world…When I suggested that we would collectively like to extract your head from your rectum, it was because you are resolutely unwilling to see the world from any perspective other than your own privileged position…. I feel sorry for you, and occasionally a slight bit ashamed at myself for speaking harshly to an elderly woman.

Apparently, individual white women are not entitled to their world view. What is it called when someone is considered part of a race/class of persons, and not an individual?

But it gets worse.

In a recent Guardian interview, author Raziel Reid, Governor General Award winner for the young adult novel When Everything Feels Like the Movies, characterized the tittle of negative reaction to his book as evidence of Canada’s “strong anti-gay sentiment.”

But Canada doesn’t have a “strong anti-gay sentiment.” In fact, it’s among the most gay-friendly places extant.

In 1967 (two years before Stonewall), then-Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau famously opined, “There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation,” right before he initiated an update of the laws on abortion, divorce, and homosexuality. In 2004, Canada became the fourth nation in the world (after the Netherlands, Belgium, and Spain) to legalize same sex marriage. These days, Lonely Planet says our home and native land is “hands down the most advanced and progressive nation in the Americas for the gay community.” They single out Toronto, third on their list of “most gay friendly places on the planet…a beacon for the LGBTQ traveller in North America.”

So does a petition against the awarding of a prize to this book mean we’ve turned into a country of gay-bashers? Get a grip...

[Also on HuffPo.ca]

My Encounter with Canada Writes: Close Encounters with Science

I just finished up a rewarding stint as a reader with CBC's Canada Writes, science edition. The latest theme was "Close Encounters with Science." It was a moving and humbling experience.

The challenge:

"Send us a true personal story of a close encounter you had with science and technology. We were looking for personal stories that gave us an insight into human nature and how changes in our understanding of the world have made a lasting effect on who we are."

Along with Scott Fotheringham, I read through the 600+ submissions and sent in my choices (I was limited to 15...) Here's the longlist, 29 stories that are worth your time. 

Twenty-nine: makes me think Scott and I only agreed on one, lol. But the truth is, it was incredibly hard to choose. I could have selected 50, or more, that were worthwhile!

(Scott, by the way, is a novelist and PhD from Cornell who no longer works in science, either. I think we probably should talk...:)

 Enjoy this trailer for his well-reviewed speculative novel, The Rest is Silence; I look forward to reading it very soon.

 ~~~~

 Here is an excerpt of the interview I did with Canada Writes my experience reading for the contest:

Can you describe a couple of the stories from the challenge that struck you as standouts?

There were so many wonderful stories, it was hard to choose. But some were just stellar. “Firsts,” about a technician working overnight at the hospital, analyzing blood sent from the ER. Who thinks about the lab tech? We get these machine readouts from our blood tests…we don’t really think about the person at the other end of the pipette. The writer had me right there with him (or her), feeling the weight of the world on his shoulders when called upon to diagnose leukemia in a child. That really touched me. There were many, many stories about electrification, and television. About all kinds of things: Skype and texting, the moon walk. Many were about children learning from their parents; “The New Age” is a quiet story of a kid going outside with Dad and brother to watch Sputnik pass overhead one night in October 1957. “Better Living Through Chemistry,” about what getting the meds right has meant to a person with schizophrenia. A woman who waited six months for an MRI and was so distressed by its claustrophobic nature, she stopped the test. How she was able to depend “on the kindness of strangers.” One about a teacher who knew how to talk physics so that young guys would listen. The experiment a six-year-old designed to identify the tooth fairy…I could go on and on. It was the way the writers communicated the meaning, the emotion, the small epiphanies attached to the scientific or technological experience. The stories I chose all answered that question: how did you feel when it happened? And they did it by bringing me along on the journey.


You can read the 29 stories on the longlist here. Congratulations to all who entered!

"The next task is in the capable hands of CBC host and author Nora Young, who will select the winner of this challenge. That person will receive $1,000 from the Canada Council for the Arts.

The winner will be announced on Canada Writes on Wednesday, December 5th. Stay tuned!"

The Meaning Of Children: FREE ebook version on Amazon.com

FREE and for a limited time…

 

My book, The Meaning Of Children, on Amazon.com and you’re invited to download it!

(Yes, this is me, at about 9 months old)

To learn more about this publishing experiment, check out my interview, “Cutting out the middle man”, with CBC Montreal Cinq a Six’s incomparable Jeanette Kelly. It was broadcast yesterday; you can find it here (called--what else?-- "Cutting out the middle man").

 

I think it's a great story collection, but don't just take my word for it--try the free samples (yes, absolutely FREE! And for the first lucky thousand downloads, I'll throw in a set of FREE STEAK KNIVES!...Ummm, no, I won't...Sorry. Use your teeth).

 

BUT there are FREE samples: read "Tumbalalaika" using Amazon's "Look Inside" feature (it won second prize in The Antigonish Review's 2008 Sheldon Currie Fiction Contest).

 

Here's a link to another of my favourite pieces, the perfect story for Mother's Day--or Remembrance Day, come to think of it—a little gem of flash fiction story, name of “Pie,” http://www.fictionaut.com/stories/beverly-akerman/pie--2 ; a couple of dozen reader reactions are included below (they loved it as much as I do!).

 

If you’d like to know more about what I’m hoping to accomplish, please check out the other recent posts on this blog.


Ciao!

The Meaning Of Children: it's getting hard to keep up

D'oh! Just discovered my CBC radio interview of yesterday, about my experiment in self-publishing the Kindle version of The Meaning Of Children, is, in fact, already accessible on the Cinq a Six web page: click on the blue link "Cutting out the middle man," on the lower right (black background).

http://www.cbc.ca/cinqasix/

Read the incredible feedback from readers and reviewers of The Meaning Of Children here.

But one-word summaries include "captivating," "touching," "amazing," "lovely," "extraordinary"...(I'm stopping here because I'm getting choked up AND my head is swelling, not the best combination, I fear...)


The second piece of good news is a new essay that summarizes my life as an emerging writer, just out in The Montreal Review. It's part of their "The Writing Life Series" and features other intriguing writers like Doug Harris, the author of YOU comma Idiot (not the title of my biography...though maybe it should be).

As always, any comments or questions would be much appreciated, either here or you can find me on Facebook, Goodreads, or Twitter (@beverly_akerman). Oh and my book's Facebook page is http://www.facebook.com/TheMeaningofChildren.

Sat., March 31st, ~5:30 pm: Publish or perish?

Bev Akerman justifies her Kindle give-aways...

Does she or doesn't she know what she's doing?

~5:30 PM on CBC Radio One's Cinq à Six

88.5 FM on the Montreal dial.

 

Live streamed & archived at http://www.cbc.ca/cinqasix/. 

In which your hero attempts to explain 

to the charming, talented Jeanette Kelly 

WHY on earth

she GAVE away 120+ copies of 

the Kindle version of the spectacularly reviewed

The Meaning Of Children 

last Saturday, March 24th,

not to mention why she will do it again!

Jeanette Kelly, host of Cinq a Six

Does she really know what she's doing? Who knows...

One writer, desperate to regain control of her brilliant career, trying to thrive without totally losing it...her shirt, her joie de vivre, etcetera!

Give a listen, I hope it doesn't sound too totally weird. But weird can still be artistic, excellent, AND fun, can it not? Witness the career of Steve Buscemi...

Steve Buscemi

 STAY TUNED...

 (There was a teaser this morning, which I did NOT hear...but some of my friends did!)

Updates here...
 
Goodreads profile.


And a new essay on how she came to write The Meaning Of Children.

Anonymous gay sex, abortion, and GUNS for teenagers...another fine day on Facebook!

Yesterday was a really interesting day, in real life and on my Facebook page...

You can find me here, but I already have 5,000 followers (actually, I'm often over their limit. SHH!). 

But I'd love to "meet" you: please subscribe to my posts and/or follow my book page: http://www.facebook.com/TheMeaningofChildren.

But I--as I am so often wont to do that my friend Sandy Dubya (also on FB--SHH!) sometimes accuses me of having ADD. Oops: so distracted by the subordinate clause (or whatever), I forgot to add "digress."

Started off the day by accompanying hubby at 6:30 am (okay, 6:40, but who's keeping track?!) to the Concordia University PERFORM Centre, their absolutely gorgeous new athletic centre! I was sorely tempted to skim Facebook while I was on the eliptical...but to tell you the truth, it's damn hard to type while moving on those machines (I suppose they should look into that...no, not really!)

Here are a couple of photos of the place, courtesy the University (actually, I just lifted them, but I don't think they'll mind!):

I'm not sure this inside view does it justice...let's just say it reminded me of Montreal's new concert hall...something about the blond Formica. Okay, maybe that's an exaggeration. But it was 6:40 am--I can be forgiven for making strangish associations.

Then it was on to a couple of hours of mundane daily tasks until it was time for the day's notable event: an interview with Jeanette Kelly for CBC Radio's Cinq a six show.

Should air Saturday between, you guessed it, 5 and 6 pm. We talked about my ebook experiment, and I revealed how many copies I gave away in 24 hours last Saturday...bypass the middle man, I say. For

They are some of my most fun--sorry, funnest--posts today:

"Very grateful to the CBC Cinq a Six people for having me in today...here's a photo of my CBC Prize Pack, with some careful product placement, bookwise. First person to name all books & authors pictured gets my Mike Finnerty pinup magnet (must say, Mr. F is looking pretty buff in this photo...)"

Here's a better shot of Mr. F, slightly fuzzy, but what can you do (maybe he was unclear on some concept or other when the photo was being taken):

 

In any event, all are cordially invited to listen to my conversation with Jeanette Kelly, tomorrow (SATURDAY) on Cinq a six! (show is 5 to 6 pm), 88.5 FM or live streamed at http://www.cbc.ca/cinqasix/ 

Sign up on Facebook--I'd love to know you'll be listening! Here's hoping I sound half-way intelligible...

(Here's the link, in case you'd like to forward it to someone:

http://www.facebook.com/events/415324261815476/).

The event blurb: 

"Listen up, starving authors. The revolution, she is HERE!" In which I (try to) explain to Jeanette Kelly why I GAVE away 120 copies of the Kindle version of The Meaning Of Children last Saturday, March 24th (and will do it again!).

One writer, desperate to control of brilliant career, lol, while living to enjoy the process!

Give a listen, I hope it doesn't sound too totally weird. (But weird can still be fun, can it not? Witness the career of Steve Buscemi...)"

The guns for teenagers advice comes from Canada's answer to Charlton Heston, Gary Breitkreuz, Member of Parliament from Outer Boondocks, Saskatchewan (with apologies to his constituents, I know that's not where YOU live...but I think it's where HE lives. Metaphorically speaking. Or maybe more like outer space...in terms of understanding gun crime in Canada). 

A pithy quote from my piece: 

"Though our Prime Minister may refuse to face it, rifles and shotguns are the firearms used most often to threaten women and children, and the weapons of choice in the murder of police officers."

Okay, so that's guns, the CBC...I am running out of steam here.

Abortion: 

Gay sex: my interest was piqued by a Salon piece (sorry!) praising roadside rest stop sex...

Don't forget, possums,  

The Meaning Of Children is now half-price on Kindle! 

THAT'S 75 % OFF THE PAPERBACK PRICE!!

Ta ta for now...

Whoops, I did it again...The Meaning Of Children 50% off March 28th

After the phenomenal success last week, giving away the Kindle version of my award winning book, "The Meaning of Children" completely gratis, I've decided to put it on sale for the next few days at 50 per cent off: that's $4.99 (because who can afford to give their work away forever??)

As always, you are welcome to try a free sample or two...

*try a piece a mah "Pie"

*or read the first story of the collection, "Tumbalalaika," originally published in The Antigonish Review, where it won second prize in the 2008 Sheldon Currie Fiction Contest (links to more free stories to the right of this post).

I'm still very proud of the book. And so is my mother, lol! 

Mom & her famous grandkid charm necklace

And let's not forget my Dad, who is also kvelling.

Dad & me!

But don't take our word for it...read the incredible feedback I've received from dozens of readers, reviewers, and other writers, the latest of whom is  

CBC Radio's David Gutnick: "Really liked it...there are all kinds of gems in your stories."

(which makes me think of Sally Field, accepting that Academy Award for Norma Rae, way back in 1980. Before my time, of course ;)

Sally Field, 1980: "You like me!"

"Can you handle the truth, Canada Reads?" No More Ms. Nice Guy

The kerfuffle on Canada Reads, where one of the country’s most successful and prominent lawyers ever, Anne-France Goldwater, annihilated her competition on Day 1, was an amazing demonstration of the power of the adversarial system. Goldwater is the lawyer who, on her clients' behalf, pushed Canada into legalizing same sex marriage and, for the moment, has won spousal support rights for unmarried spouses who separate (and against a Quebec billionaire, yet!).

Now, Canadians are supposed to be, above all,  nice. Pirouetting little peaceniks and peacekeepers. 

Host Jian Ghomeshi is probably the epitome of what a multiculti Canada wants to believe itself to be, a good looking vaguely failed rocker who asks questions of successful people, and looks good in a nice suit.

What Me Goldwater did, as far as the typical nice Canadian is concerned, was enter the competitors' arena, both barrels blazing. Everything about her was most unCanadian. 

She branded one memoirist a terrorist and the other a liar.

What she did was doubly instructive:  an unabashed advertisement for lawyers, cogently demonstrating that “an untrained person who acts as her own lawyer has a fool for a client.” 

And it also shows how pusillanimous the show’s concept really is.

As a bonus, it pinpoints why a House of Commons full of lawyers (and other professional debaters) is as dysfunctional as it is. You asked for a debate, Me Goldwater sort of said, at one point. It doesn't mean that anything I said was true...

Goldwater took a flamethrower to the place.

Let's face it: Canada Reads, from what I can tell, is about looking good, not about being smart. I mean, a book from 1983 about hockey?

Imagine, a show where two memoirs are challenged for their veracity and no one even recalls James Frey’s A Million Little Pieces? Hard to believe…for well-read people, I mean.

I’m a reader and I’d never heard of any of the books in contention. And last year’s winner, The Best Laid Plans, may have had Terry Fallis laughing all the way to the bank, but he's probably the only one who laughed much at that book. A mildly entertaining page turner, a pathetic champion.

No wonder my book club friends laugh outright when I suggest a novel that made the Giller or Governor General short lists.

Me Goldwater’s sin was that they sent a lawyer to do a model-slash-musician’s job. She isn’t gorgeous and she wasn’t gentlemanly. They hired her--or chose her, anyway-- as an advocate, she gave it her best shot, and she blew the competition--and host--right out of the water.

Too bad for Jian and the rest of the lightweights that no one realized the extent by which Goldwater outclassed the rest of the field. 

Though someone must have had a clue what would happen: they gave her The Tiger to defend, after all.

Anne-France Goldwater doesn't belong on nice, bland Canada Reads: she belongs in Rideau Hall. 

From Goldwater Dubé's website:

·       Me Goldwater's practice highlights include establishing precedents on the recognition of parental alienation syndrome by the courts, the right of children to the attorney of their choice and to claim party status, as well as disparate children’s rights such as lump sum support and mandatory reinstatement in a private educational institution. She also successfully challenged federal and provincial laws forbidding marriage for same-sex couples, thereby obtaining the right of same-sex couples to marry.

·       She successfully challenged the validity of laws preventing women from executing their own alimony and child support orders. She advanced the protection of privacy rights in family matters in the context of paternity litigation. She has obtained the highest child support orders in Quebec, and the highest provisions for cost in a matrimonial matter.

·       She is perhaps best known for her success in the case of Eric vs. Lola, in which she successfully challenged the validity of laws denying common law spouses the right to claim spousal support upon separation, in a unanimous Court of Appeal judgment.

The Meaning Of Children makes the Top 10 list of the CBC - Scotiabank Giller Prize Readers' Choice Contest

I was just thrilled to discover today that The Meaning Of Children made the Top 10 list of the CBC- Scotiabank Giller Prize Readers' Choice Contest!! The top book, Myrna Dey's Extensions went on to a place on the Longlist...

Here's the list:

• Extensions by Myrna Dey (6.9 per cent of total eligible nominations; Congratulations on making the Giller LONGLIST!!!)

• The Canterbury Trail by Angie Abdou (5.6 per cent )

• Everything Was Good-bye by Gurjinder Basran (5.5 per cent)

• Copernicus Avenue by Andrew Borkowski (3.6 per cent)

• Hope Burned by Brent LaPorte (3.5 per cent)

• Echoes from the Other Land by Ava Homa (3 per cent )

• Man & Other Natural Disasters by Nerys Parry (2.6 per cent) *

• Don't Be Afraid by Steven Hayward (2.6 per cent) *

• Incidents in the Life of Markus Paul by David Adams Richards (2.3 per cent)

• The Meaning of Children by Beverly Akerman (2.2 per cent)

http://www.cbc.ca/books/scotiabankgillerprize/readerschoice/

Here are the comments made by those who voted for me, people who hail from all over Canada...a huge shout out to you all!!

Johanna from Kelowna: thanks so much for this: "As a social worker in child protection I really appreciated the focus and the insights into the lives of children demonstrated in the work The Meaning of Children by Beverly Akerman. Our children are our future and deserve more attention, love and nurturing. Beverly's book is a method to that purpose; she touched my heart to its core."

Kathe from Montreal: "I have been savouring the stories one by one. I don't want this book to end. She writes so simply but powerfully, and her characters stay with you."

B Maurene: "If the reality of Akerman's skilful weaving of tales that can be all too true of the way parents families and cultures place their hopes and dreams on children hits home to contemporary child bearers, she could be building a better world. Few who embark on the journey of parenting ever realize how great the responsibilities are or how to meet the individual needs of children, particularly those with difficulties. A should read for college and university students, and a must read, among the hundreds of pregnancy and child rearing how-to manuals, for parents attending pre-natal classes."

Marla of Thunder Bay: "Beverly Akerman is an extraordinary writer and I believe she deserves it."

Suzan of Ottawa: "It was an absolute joy to read. I laughed out loud at some stories and wept shamelessly at others, all the while savouring every skilfully handpicked word. One cannot read The Meaning of Children and not be moved in some way by the stories therein. It is a beautiful quilt, made of exquisitely crafted pieces which when taken as a whole is so much more than a sum of its parts."

Eva from Maple Ridge: "The Meaning of Children should win because it is important for the reader to view situation from the child's perspective."

Lynn from Belle River: "Beverly Akerman would be a good candidate. Enlightening and refreshing."

Paula from Cornwall: "In her book The Meaning of Children, Beverly Akerman gives us a snap shot of the reality of childhood in diverse family situations. As and educator, I understand too clearly that the reality that childhood is not always a "Norman Rockwell" moment, but rather is a reflection of the very complex perception of an individual child, whether pleasant or challenging, the question remains, is the individual child free to be themselves or are they encouraged to put on a mask to face their personal circumstances?"

Rusti of Stony Plain: "This collection of short stories was stunning, captivating, wrenching and hopeful. I wanted more when I finished the book."

Ken from Saskatoon: "The author's insight into the minds of children and the lives touched by those around them allow the reader to truly appreciate how impressionable these young minds are, and how the events in our lives can effect how children perceive, and register them. It also reminds me of how important my son is to me, as when I face conflict or stress in my life, all of the problems dissapear intantly when I see him smile at me."

Kayla from Timmins: "This author should make it to this year's Scotiabank Giller Prize because she writes books on life's reality which is a subject that may teach kids like adults about some of life's matters."

Rocio from Mississauga: "I think Beverly Akerman, with The Meaning of Children, should be considered, because throughout her book she shows how children can change our world, with their hearts, dreams and tenderness. They do not even know how much this world changes for the best just because they are part of it, and that is really touching and marvelous."

Pauline from Montreal: "Beverly Akerman's The Meaning of Children takes an eyes-wide-open look at real families. No sentimentality here yet there's a ring of truth to the often quirky situations people find themselves in that made me smile with recognition. A wry smile at times, but Akerman writes pitch-perfect prose. This is Canadian story-telling at its best."

Felicia from Boisseavain (cribbed from Anne Chudobiak):" The book touches on a lot of the biggest parental 'what ifs.' Kidnapping. Hate crime. Death by drowning. Suicide. Even so, it would make a good gift for a new mother. Akerman holds up our greatest fears, not to dwell on them, but to marvel at our commitment to life, especially to passing it on to others. Says one character, looking back, 'Life had been perfect ' but I'd been too busy to notice."

Valerie from Toronto: "As an early childhood educator I feel it really conveys the voices of children and parents in our society."

Frances from Port Coquitlam: "An in depth look at the inner turmoils of a childs life and/or those who care for them and how life experiences can have such an impact on our stories and journies through life. An interesting study on this subject."

Kimberly from Shawnigan Lake: "I believe Beverly Akerman's, The Meaning of Children has amazing insight with it's many stories. I loved them all, Life is what happens in the meantime. Great read and would highly recommend."

Mona from ND Ile Perrot:"I'd like to suggest Beverly Akerman. Her book, The Meaning of Children is written with a refreshing sincerity. Loved it!"

Carrie from Spruce Grove: "I think that it takes a special kind of skill to coordinate short stories into a piece that is well written and thought provoking- without losing one's initial objectives."

Crystal from Nanaimo: "The Meaning of Children is my submission as it is told through the voices of children. What can be better than to hear 14 different stories of growing up and dealing with important issues? Each child tells their stories so vividly and honestly, you feel sorry for them, as if you know them. This book is extremely well written and gripping."

Catherine from Whitby: "Well written, captivating perspectives on life's stages."

Rajini from Canada: "I think that Beverly Akerman should make the long list. Akerman's The Meaning of Children is a dark, thought-provoking read that is certainly worthy of the 2011 Giller Prize."

The Meaning Of Children is available in fine bookstores across Canada and online at Amazon.ca, Chapters, and through Exile Editions.