Thank You, "Intervention"

"Intervention" aired it's final episode this summer and, while I've talked about the show before, I wanted to do so again.  Despite the fact that reality TV started on PBS, people often speak of it with disdain.  Say that they don't watch it, or that they only watch a few shows.  I tend to point to "Intervention"  (along with some of my favorite competitive reality shows) as shows that I not only enjoy, but believe make a difference. I think a single episode of "Intervention" demonstrates how deeply addiction affects the addict and all those around the addict, how powerfully you begin to believe that the line of what you will and won't do isn't gone, it's just shifting a little, even though to others you may appear long gone.  And how much some addicts and family are unable to see any way out, so they just continue on. 
It sounds mean, to follow an addict and their family member for a week or two, talk to them about the before and the now, and then offer treatment at the end and hope the follow up provides a clip of a happy addict.  However, as I've mentioned before, the show demonstrates the profound nature of addiction.  How cool the addicts tell you their lives are, how much they love getting high all the time.  Juxtaposed with them drooling in their food or yelling and making no sense depending on their substance(s) of choice.  The interventionists sent by the show, sit with the families for a whole day ahead of time, prepping them and reminding them that they too will need to make big changes to their behavior.  I read a while back that they worked really hard to match addicts to rehabs that specialized in their issues, and really believed 90 days (no less) was the way to go.  Sometimes the most resistant folks were the family members.  One addict flipped out and tried to make her family all sign a contract that they would get treatment too.  Seems paranoid until she finished up 90 days later, and the number of her family that had gone for their weekend of family treatment - that would be none.  (She did okay even so.  But it meant she had to stay away from her family a little longer.) 
According to the screens they flashed in the final episode - 243 interventions performed, 208 accepted, 156 sober.  Those are amazing numbers.  Finding decent comparison statistics is hard given you would have to start with some sort of accurate number of addicts, and good luck collecting that info.  But best guesses seem to be that on average most people working on their own or with professionals have about a 50% success rate getting the addict to agree to treatment, and of those 50% about half relapse.  Now, I wasn't there when the "Intervention" folks did their adding, so I imagine that success number includes people who relapsed but then got help, but it seems that comparatively, the "Intervention" agreement to treatment numbers were much higher, and ongoing success also higher.  I still think the show would be worth it if it's numbers were equal, but I like to bring this up when people mention it's exploitative.
Other than follow up visits, they did not follow the addict into treatment.  I think that's important, since I personally imagine that the deep, dark work one needs to do in that setting is probably not well served by the presence of cameras.  (I could be wrong.) 
And, I adore that Candy Finnigan (my tied for favorite interventionist, because, well, Jeff Van Vonderon was wonderful too) now gets stopped in the grocery store.  (I also think the idea that people in the grocery store are freaking out that Candy is there to get them is probably why they had to stop, but I still adore that Candy is chatting with folks about their moms in the store). 
I wanted to thank the show, all the families who agreed to talk honestly (mostly) about this with a camera, and to put these stories out there.  I watched the re-runs because they always did follow ups and I liked seeing that this or that person had stayed sober, gotten married, gone back to college, or started talking to their kids again.  Some of these people were self-medicating mental illnesses that the treatment allowed them to diagnose and address.  The interventionists shared hard truths (I once cheered when the interventionist told the family to own up to the wrongs they had done) and sometimes laughed or cried or prayed with the family. 
And, think, not only of the 156 sober, but all the people around them who can breathe easier to have their family member back. 

Dear Project Runway Designers

I know we're only two episodes in, but I have some notes. 
Dear Timothy,
I recognize that even on the way to worthy causes like environmentalism, we all have to make choices.  But.  If you are going to take a hard line stance on things like sustainability, you have to be able to explain how you made your choices.  I suppose it's possible it was edited out, but I for one do not understand.  In the first challenge you said that you didn't want to use hair tools on your model due to the electricity, and yet, I saw you use a sewing machine (to say nothing of all the electricity in the building you work and live in on the show, or to, you know power the cameras on this TV show you auditioned for) and I have noticed you using your show-provided tablet for sketching, so it isn't that you just are trying to keep your personal footprint small, somehow hair tools, seem different to you. 
Just like you decided only sustainable makeup could be used and yet it never occurred to you to google the make up company that the show has used for umpteen seasons and find out about that.  Or considered that your model(s) might feel at risk as a result of no or limited hair and makeup.  (I realize the designers almost never consider the model, but well, especially now that the judges get the up close look, you want that model on your side.) 
I applaud your desire to work towards a more ecological type of fashion, but just like the cage-free vs. free-range egg labels, I think you need to more clearly define your stance. 
Also, pretty is just superficial?  Really?  Aren't you on a show about clothes?

Dear Sandro,
All clothes should cover a person's crotch. 

Dear Sue,
I'm all for being self taught.  But you auditioned for a show that uses sewing machines.  As far as I'm aware, they don't force you to use them, but given you wanted a tutorial in the first episode, I assume your plan was to use them, and somehow you thought your competitors could take time out of their schedules to teach you to do something you could have decided to learn for yourself somewhere along the way.  And, while I understand, sometimes we all need to whine, but something along the lines of "I don't have time to learn how to do this right now" may be true but it is hardly your competitors fault that you arrived on a show without a skill you have determined you need to move forward.

Three Interesting Things

1. I'm not sure which I find more surprising - that the first female firefighter came to be just over the river in Virginia or that it was recent. (Hey, I call that recent!)  They now have a firefighter girl's camp to encourage young women to consider this career path. 
2. While I confess, I hardly use a landline these days, that doesn't mean I don't understand why people want the possibility.  Post-hurricane Sandy, some residents have found the landlines are not being rebuilt, instead replaced with Voice link, which is a little box with an antenna, and yeah, is kind of like a cell phone. 
3. Author Maggie Stiefvater has a post about how sometimes, yes, red curtains are in the book to make you think something.

Books and Panels and Awards, Oh My!

It seems strange to spend more time on the aquarium than the rest of the conference, but so much of the conference is, well, in addition to the great panels, the in between times.  After all, as is true in cons of all shapes and sizes, you are surrounded by people who love this thing you love too.  They love talking about books and thinking about books and acquiring books.  The people in front of me in the shipping line had two boxes (and okay, they might also run a review blog, I'm not sure what your point is, really).  And the elevators and lunch tables and lobbies and bars are surrounded by people who have taken time out of their schedule to be hear and talk and think about books and the writing of them. 
So, panel highlights - I mentioned the PRO panel with Dorien Kelly - it also included Courtney Milan and the two talked about the business of being a writer.  I moderated Jeannie Lin and Shawntelle Madison's panel on incorporating culture which was wonderful and gave me lots to chew on.  There was a PRO panel on publicity.  There were keynote and award luncheon speeches that made me cry (dammit).  Lisa Gardner gave a great workshop on romantic suspense.  I was interviewed briefly about pitching for Swedish television.  (No, I have no other details.  And really, I just like thinking that's out there, somewhere in the ether.) 
I saw lots of people I'd met before and met lots more.  I rubbed up against two new Golden Heart winners.  Although I firmly believe that as I told quite a few people, the finaling is really, really cool.  Winning is cool too (I imagine) but the finaling is still a really select crowd. 
I talked to fiber folk, threatened to start a fiber workshop at a future RWA, and told one writer about ravelry.  (I won't name names just in case her next book is late for some reason I'm sure I know nothing about.)  I had sushi, and tuna tartare, and possibly quite a few dirty Arnold Palmers.  I met a bunch of first timers, some of whom had listed their place of origin as being in the DC area so hope to see them at a future WRW meeting. 
I went to the Autography signing where I told many, many people, that as an early ebook adopter this makes me so happy.  (I now have six signed ebooks.  See, I was restrained.)  My visions for what could be done with this technology from virtual giveaways to virtual signings following video chats are pretty big. 
I made not worthy motions at anyone wearing a board of directors ribbon.  And I expressed thanks and sympathy at the lovely RWA staffer who, among other things, manages the awards program.  (The announcement about the awards changes for 2014 is amazing, but let's all  send nice vibes to the people who have to deal with the shipping logistics of that.) 
I threatened to take a screen cap of my phone because on Saturday my agenda included going to the Nora Roberts party.  (The champagne was lovely. And everyone looked shiny and sparkly and there were many great shoes.) 
Lovely people, mermaids many of them, saved me seats and led me to dinner and generally took great care of me.  I escaped one afternoon for pool and hot tub time, just so my brain could finish processing all the fun I'd been having. 
And on my way back to the airport I ran into a fellow cherry again, and then in the airport I saw a Rita winner, and once through security (and wow, it took me forty five minutes to get my bag checked and me to the gate between the number of kiosks that were out, the low number of attendants at the desk, and the pace of the security line).  Once at my gate met another WRW member trying to fly standby (I hope she made the next flight, mine was chock full).  Saw more people I knew and even spotted a lifetime achievement award winner reading on my plane. 
I got back and napped, and read, and paid important attention to the cat. And thought about next year, when we get to do it all over again. 
 

Last Week - And Then There Were Books

Wednesday was the first day I had to be somewhere at a specific time.  The YARWA chapter had some YA things planned so we gathered and paneled and chatted about things YA.  I also had the chance to go up and introduce myself to Katie McGarry as her stalker.  (Yes, I do this. Later I tried to convince her to just give me a whole box of books and let me be her DC area book evangelist. She was not convinced this was the best method of distribution.)  Margie Lawson was there, and because she knows her audience she used some great examples from Katie McGarry's Pushing the Limits and Romily Bernard's Find Me.  (I am now the lucky winner of one of the signed ARC's Romily kindly provided.  I might have hugged it and carried it home on the plane with me.) 
And after that, was the Literacy signing.  I opted for picture taking and chatting rather than book buying, only because I already had a bag full of books and the conference had not even started.  Some of the authors actually had books that were not otherwise out yet, so in addition to getting them signed and helping raise money for literacy, there were not even out yet books.  (I know.  I think this demonstrates restraint and we shall all keep this in mind when I speak of the box of books I shipped home, or the other book I bought after reading up on the Rita nominees.) 
So - some authors I snuck up on and photographed include:
Jude Devereaux.  Later Dorien Kelly would tell the story of being introduced to romance novels through the gateway book that was Knight in Shining Armor.  I might have shared that book with quite a few friends in high school and some sighs and squees. 

Two Kaye's for the price of one!  Laura Kaye and Robin Kaye.  (I told Robin Kaye I was her stalker too, even though we've met before.  I really think that proves my point.) 

Maureen McGowan with a stack of books. (For now.)

Rita finalist Tracy Brogan.

Ally Carter. (See how restrained I was there. It happens.)

Sarra Cannon. I have some more of her stuff to read too.

And Huntley Fitzpatrick with her new book.

At a later event, I captured Sherry Thomas signing her upcoming YA book.

And here's Emily McKay signing now Rita winning The Farm.