A story about hook-up regrets and how sex can be like junk food. Also: Jonah Hill's anxiety, and why the Paul Newman-Joanne Woodward doc reminds us we need more stories about long marriages
Another great Smoke ‘Em episode--thank you, Sarah and Nancy!
Towards the top of the episode, Sarah wondered if any listeners were teachers. Well, ladies, my name is Sally and I’m a teacher. 🙋♀️ For me, the best part of Sarah’s story (beyond her teacher’s email) was Nancy’s gasped reaction to it. That’s authenticity at its finest. 😊
A well-kept secret among many veteran high school teachers (myself included) is that we don’t remember all of our former students. Although I’m not proud to say it, 90-130ish students per year over 20 years is quite a few. Please know, Sarah, you must have especially stood out among decades of high-achieving English students for a former teacher to contact you out-of-the-blue. Kudos to you!
Yes I loved Nancy's gasp, too. I've always been told by teachers that when you see them, you should introduce yourself, even if you think they will remember you, it's just good form. I was totally honored that Mrs. Dillard (do I call her Mary now?) had tracked me down like that. I will say: Hepola is a very unusual name. :) -- SH
It’s funny, as I think (regardless of age) it always feels strange to call a former teacher by his/her first name, even though most teachers insist on it. 😊
Another great episode. At the top when Nancy and Sarah were discussing Jonah Hill, they touched on something just briefly, the subject of writers and publicity and whether or not they should be (or should feel pressured to be) on Twitter or other social media.
As it happens, I am (re)reading Cal Newport's Deep Work at the moment, and he mentions an essay by Jonathan Franzen about just this- his rejection of Twitter, calling it unbecoming to the serious novelist. I think the essay has been scrubbed from the Internet, but I'm wondering if anyone has read it or know where it can be found? Apparently, Jennifer Weiner fervently objected to Franzen's position, and they have also been embroiled in a longstanding battle about other issues, particularly his belittlement of "chick lit," her defense of it (although I don't think she uses that term), etc. I'm fuzzy on any more details than that, but a little inside baseball for anyone who doesn't already know! Worth a Google if anyone is interested.
Also, to Sarah, I have loved Tom Waits forever (I'm gonna say even before you because I'm just a shade older than you), and somehow managed to never see the video for Downtown Train. Now I have, and I love Tom more than ever for it. Thank you.
Oh I remember this dust-up. There was a real internet pile-on toward Franzen over that essay, part of what I think eventually mobilized the online literati against him. At the time, people were pretty utopian about Twitter. "Deep Work" has been recommended to me -- do you like it? -- SH
Hi SH! I do like Deep Work. As I say, this is my second reading. It's great if you need a kick in the butt, which I regularly do. Fairly entertaining as butt-kicking self-help books go. It's definitely made me think about how much time I spend/waste online. Now to do something about it...
A Little Life is currently one of my favorite books. I read it first in 2016 and then reread it this past January. During the reread of it, a brief scene from Jude’s past became the inspiration behind my wife and I starting the discussion about becoming foster parents. We’ll be licensed sometime within the next month. Wish us luck.
I love ALL for two reasons. First, HY is just a fantastic storyteller. Her writing sucks me in. I forget she is the author and the story is fiction. I recently read People in the Trees, and experienced the same thing. She can make a dark story, or morally horrible characters appealing.
Secondly, ALL’s depiction of how complex childhood trauma (repetitive exposure to traumatic events in childhood) can lead to an adult life dominated by an inner critic that constantly makes you feel unlovable, unwanted, unworthy, tortured by depression and anxiety, and genuinely believing you are a horrible person - that you have no worth beyond than what you can do for others - despite all your successes and loved ones seemingly proving that so wrong - that all resonated deep with me. I just kept thinking the author knows the destructive depths of depression and suicidal ideation.
Granted, HY seems to take it to an extreme in order to drive that resonance home. I never experienced anything quit as awful as what Jude does. It’s hard to imagine. On the other hand, my professional experience and what we’ve learned in foster care training makes a good argument that while Jude’s story may be extreme, it’s not entirely implausible. Rare, but implausible.
I could see how ALL would be too much to take though no matter whether a reader could relate or not.
PS Unlike Jude, therapy took for me. The healing has been immense and worth every dang red cent. But that inner critic is a tenacious fucker and still working on uprooting it entirely. 🙂
Nancy used a phrase early on: "Productive Procrastination" -- love it. I'd like all my procrastinations to be more productive. And Sarah a few minutes later, with "music in a frequency I can't hear" -- that resonated as well.
Still at the beginning of the podcast. But I wonder if Jonah Hill's letter was the publicity. I mean. We are talling about ot and hos movie. He could have. You know. NOT done any publicity
Sarah is thoughtful, articulate, grounded and speaks openly and easily. She's authentic. And with her expressive voice, it's just a great match for podcasting (podcasting/radio, podcasting is radio basically). Nancy, on the other hand, has a voice (and manner) made for the printed page. She doesn't seem comfortable here, she seems cagey, a little insecure, guarded and the pitch of her voice... no words. Maybe not a good fit? What do I know? I literally just FF to the Sarah portions. Thank you for doing it, I really love the show. (also loved the shows you did with Meghan Daum) Thanks!
Well, you've placed me in the strange position of wanting to thank you and disagree with you at once. That's not my experience of talking with Nancy, who comes across to me as spirited, intuitive, open, and generous, but you say tom-AY-toe, I say tom-AH-toe, etc. I do think I win the insecurity contest by a country mile, but then we've never actually measured. -- SH
I find Nancy to invaluable to this podcast, and this format. She comes across a woman willing to take fire for opinions that are typically targeted by fanatics to be silenced. Remarkable, really, because she also comes across as genuine as could possibly be with deep and intelligent reasons when necessary. Her voice makes me smile.
This podcast is brave. That’s it’s strength.
Nancy, I hope PJs comment motivates you to continue to speak just the way you do. I might be biased but I suspect the attack is more about not wanting your opinions to be expressed at all, than it is about their presentation. The podcast is terrific because of your voice.
I do agree with PJs assessment of Sarah, but am so incredibly annoyed by the barb at Nancy I have to wonder why the comment was even necessary. WTF, really?
I suppose Sarah and Nancy have learned to have thick skin, especially when being controversial, but please don’t change a thing. PJ is entitled to an opinion, but half of it is throw away “silence through shaming” bullshit.
Another great Smoke ‘Em episode--thank you, Sarah and Nancy!
Towards the top of the episode, Sarah wondered if any listeners were teachers. Well, ladies, my name is Sally and I’m a teacher. 🙋♀️ For me, the best part of Sarah’s story (beyond her teacher’s email) was Nancy’s gasped reaction to it. That’s authenticity at its finest. 😊
A well-kept secret among many veteran high school teachers (myself included) is that we don’t remember all of our former students. Although I’m not proud to say it, 90-130ish students per year over 20 years is quite a few. Please know, Sarah, you must have especially stood out among decades of high-achieving English students for a former teacher to contact you out-of-the-blue. Kudos to you!
Yes I loved Nancy's gasp, too. I've always been told by teachers that when you see them, you should introduce yourself, even if you think they will remember you, it's just good form. I was totally honored that Mrs. Dillard (do I call her Mary now?) had tracked me down like that. I will say: Hepola is a very unusual name. :) -- SH
It’s funny, as I think (regardless of age) it always feels strange to call a former teacher by his/her first name, even though most teachers insist on it. 😊
Another great episode. At the top when Nancy and Sarah were discussing Jonah Hill, they touched on something just briefly, the subject of writers and publicity and whether or not they should be (or should feel pressured to be) on Twitter or other social media.
As it happens, I am (re)reading Cal Newport's Deep Work at the moment, and he mentions an essay by Jonathan Franzen about just this- his rejection of Twitter, calling it unbecoming to the serious novelist. I think the essay has been scrubbed from the Internet, but I'm wondering if anyone has read it or know where it can be found? Apparently, Jennifer Weiner fervently objected to Franzen's position, and they have also been embroiled in a longstanding battle about other issues, particularly his belittlement of "chick lit," her defense of it (although I don't think she uses that term), etc. I'm fuzzy on any more details than that, but a little inside baseball for anyone who doesn't already know! Worth a Google if anyone is interested.
Also, to Sarah, I have loved Tom Waits forever (I'm gonna say even before you because I'm just a shade older than you), and somehow managed to never see the video for Downtown Train. Now I have, and I love Tom more than ever for it. Thank you.
Oh I remember this dust-up. There was a real internet pile-on toward Franzen over that essay, part of what I think eventually mobilized the online literati against him. At the time, people were pretty utopian about Twitter. "Deep Work" has been recommended to me -- do you like it? -- SH
Hi SH! I do like Deep Work. As I say, this is my second reading. It's great if you need a kick in the butt, which I regularly do. Fairly entertaining as butt-kicking self-help books go. It's definitely made me think about how much time I spend/waste online. Now to do something about it...
You two have me re-subscribed to HBO Max. And I haven't even finished the pod yet!
A Little Life is currently one of my favorite books. I read it first in 2016 and then reread it this past January. During the reread of it, a brief scene from Jude’s past became the inspiration behind my wife and I starting the discussion about becoming foster parents. We’ll be licensed sometime within the next month. Wish us luck.
I love ALL for two reasons. First, HY is just a fantastic storyteller. Her writing sucks me in. I forget she is the author and the story is fiction. I recently read People in the Trees, and experienced the same thing. She can make a dark story, or morally horrible characters appealing.
Secondly, ALL’s depiction of how complex childhood trauma (repetitive exposure to traumatic events in childhood) can lead to an adult life dominated by an inner critic that constantly makes you feel unlovable, unwanted, unworthy, tortured by depression and anxiety, and genuinely believing you are a horrible person - that you have no worth beyond than what you can do for others - despite all your successes and loved ones seemingly proving that so wrong - that all resonated deep with me. I just kept thinking the author knows the destructive depths of depression and suicidal ideation.
Granted, HY seems to take it to an extreme in order to drive that resonance home. I never experienced anything quit as awful as what Jude does. It’s hard to imagine. On the other hand, my professional experience and what we’ve learned in foster care training makes a good argument that while Jude’s story may be extreme, it’s not entirely implausible. Rare, but implausible.
I could see how ALL would be too much to take though no matter whether a reader could relate or not.
PS Unlike Jude, therapy took for me. The healing has been immense and worth every dang red cent. But that inner critic is a tenacious fucker and still working on uprooting it entirely. 🙂
Completely relate to the inner critic, and also fascinated by the foster experience decision. I've thought about that myself. Good luck! -- SH
I loooovef it. I read it in like 2018 and then 2020. I was shocked to see the pile on against it.
Nancy used a phrase early on: "Productive Procrastination" -- love it. I'd like all my procrastinations to be more productive. And Sarah a few minutes later, with "music in a frequency I can't hear" -- that resonated as well.
Thank heavens, more Smoke 'Em, I was starting to get the shakes!
Still at the beginning of the podcast. But I wonder if Jonah Hill's letter was the publicity. I mean. We are talling about ot and hos movie. He could have. You know. NOT done any publicity
Thank you Mark. Someone who listened to my narration of TO THE BRIDGE once commented that my voice was so bad it even stressed out his dog...
Nancy, I recently listened to To The Bridge and I enjoyed your narration very much. And the writing too, of course.
I recently finished listening to To The Bridge audiobook and was so happy you chose to read it yourself.
Sarah is thoughtful, articulate, grounded and speaks openly and easily. She's authentic. And with her expressive voice, it's just a great match for podcasting (podcasting/radio, podcasting is radio basically). Nancy, on the other hand, has a voice (and manner) made for the printed page. She doesn't seem comfortable here, she seems cagey, a little insecure, guarded and the pitch of her voice... no words. Maybe not a good fit? What do I know? I literally just FF to the Sarah portions. Thank you for doing it, I really love the show. (also loved the shows you did with Meghan Daum) Thanks!
Well, you've placed me in the strange position of wanting to thank you and disagree with you at once. That's not my experience of talking with Nancy, who comes across to me as spirited, intuitive, open, and generous, but you say tom-AY-toe, I say tom-AH-toe, etc. I do think I win the insecurity contest by a country mile, but then we've never actually measured. -- SH
I find Nancy to invaluable to this podcast, and this format. She comes across a woman willing to take fire for opinions that are typically targeted by fanatics to be silenced. Remarkable, really, because she also comes across as genuine as could possibly be with deep and intelligent reasons when necessary. Her voice makes me smile.
This podcast is brave. That’s it’s strength.
Nancy, I hope PJs comment motivates you to continue to speak just the way you do. I might be biased but I suspect the attack is more about not wanting your opinions to be expressed at all, than it is about their presentation. The podcast is terrific because of your voice.
I do agree with PJs assessment of Sarah, but am so incredibly annoyed by the barb at Nancy I have to wonder why the comment was even necessary. WTF, really?
I suppose Sarah and Nancy have learned to have thick skin, especially when being controversial, but please don’t change a thing. PJ is entitled to an opinion, but half of it is throw away “silence through shaming” bullshit.
I take PJ's comment to be sincere and I don't mind! We can agree we love Sarah and that's a good way to start a Monday xxx
You’re very nice.
I got my “grrrr” button pushed, obviously. :-) Happy Monday.
It’s raining in Texas... much to be happy about.
It's the combination of the two voices that makes the difference for me, that is, 1 + 1 is more than 2, by a country mile.
Each to his/her own! And I agree with every encomium about Sarah xx
Nancy speaks naturally and with passion. Strong disagree! Though I do agree with praising SH.