Monday, February 28, 2011

February in Review

First off, I'd like to say that my hair is back to normal *knock on wood*! Which just goes to show that everything works out if you complain about it on the Internet.

Secondly, I didn't read much this month. The first two books I read were nonfiction, so I decided to keep going with that trend. Nonfiction (for me) reads a lot slower than fiction. Plus a lot happened this month, and it's a short month anyway, alright? Geez.

febbk

Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance by Robert M. Pirsig. I read this book because my dad had mentioned it a few times over the years. I always said it sounded good, I'd check it out, and then would forget about it. I picked this copy up at a book sale for a dollar and started reading it that day, which means I started in mid-January and just finished the first week of February. Honestly, I probably rushed it a bit. When I re-read it, I'll take more time with it. And I'll definitely be re-reading it. I saw some reviews online where people thought it was pompous and a bunch of bull... and I can see what they mean. I, however, really enjoyed the book. I think that has everything to do with the time in my life when I read it. If I had to read it for school, I could see myself not making it through. But I've taken this year to figure myself out, and this book has greatly helped with that. If I was any younger, I wouldn't have understood, much less appreciated, anything in this book.
     That being said, I think this book is excellent. There's a narrative of a father and son going on a motorcycle trip, but hidden beneath that is the story of the father trying to remember his past, which includes a stint as a professor and a PhD candidate, and ends in his going insane, back in the times where electroshock therapy was the answer. If the title seems daunting to you, don't be scared - part of the author's note reads: "..It should in no way be associated with that great body of factual information relating to orthodox Zen Buddhist practice. It's not very factual on motorcycles either."

The Lost Continent by Bill Bryson. Bryson is hilarious. Random sentences had me laughing out loud, and it was hard to put the book down even at the end of a chapter because I wanted to read on and laugh some more. He makes you want to take a road trip, preferably with him along for the ride, supplying witty quips you could never think of yourself. Definitely going to read his entire catalog.

Party of One by Anneli Rufus. Another book where timing is important. I tried reading it last summer but couldn't get into it - probably because I was living with someone in pretty close quarters. Now, with a lot of time spent alone, I'm able to give it the attention it deserves. A book about those who prefer to be alone, Rufus addresses both the personal feelings of loners and how they're portrayed and accepted (or not) in the mainstream.
     As someone who has always preferred being alone, even as a kid, this book opened my eyes to a lot of things. I used to feel strange that I didn't like going out and being social, but now I realize a lot of people feel that way (especially creative types - ego boost!) and it's nothing to be ashamed of. There were moments when I felt my heart expand with happiness that someone (or many someones) understood. There were some ideas that were much too extreme for me, but this isn't a "How To" book - it includes a lot of historical references and an extensive bibliography.

IV by Chuck Klosterman. Klosterman has a way of writing essays about pop culture that make you forget they're actually about pop culture. Many read like short stories - too short, cut off without a substantial ending. He is funny in a slight way, more like using dry humor to state what others are thinking. Each essay in this book is led by a thought-provoking question; many are silly, some are deep, but all will make you think about your reply. I especially like his trademark footnotes that allow him to add more thoughts or asides to the published articles. The last section of the book was a short story that, in my opinion, doesn't live up to his other writings. In fact, it made me think of my first creative writing workshop, in which I was the only girl. His short story was exactly what those undergrad guys wrote, what they thought they should write, because they were men and they had things to say, even if those things didn't really mean anything.

The Year of Magical Thinking by Joan Didion. A very personal book about grief, mourning, and "moving on." Didion's daughter is in the hospital in grave condition when Didion's husband, John, dies suddenly at the dinner table. Her daughter goes into a coma, gets better, gets worse, and Didion tries to deal with this while accepting the fact that she is a widow after forty years of marriage. The book is not sentimental, which I applaud Didion for achieving while addressing such a serious, emotional topic. She references equal amounts of medical research and poetry, and her writing at times mirrors both. Still, it leaves a huge impact. There were times when I started crying just imagining having to deal with a portion of what she was going through. Powerful and well-written.

Eating the Dinosaur by Chuck Klosterman. I think this has been my favorite of his essay collections. Many of the essays were more abstract, dealing with time travel and laugh tracks moreso than pop culture directly. It made me think a lot more, it made me use my imagination. I didn't care for the blurbs between chapters. They were sometimes interesting to read, but bothered me overall. They read like excerpts from interviews, but you were never told who was speaking about what, so most of them felt like a waste - reading words with no context.
     After I finished this book, I stared at the cover for a little, as I like to do. A blurb from the Wall Street Journal caught my eye: "Mr. Klosterman's relentlessly thoughtful prose makes a case that our arts and entertainment are more suffused with meaning than ever before."
     Okay, I suppose I see the point. But isn't Klosterman mocking the "importance" of and in pop culture? Isn't that why his essays are funny and sad and true? Personally, that's the merit I find in Klosterman. I don't particularly love his essay style. I respect that he knows a lot about pop culture and therefore is the perfect person to make fun of it. The first essay in the book deals with the truth in media and the purpose of interviews and how truthful they really are. I feel like, by starting with that particular point, Klosterman is winking at us, telling us yes, this book is just for fun and trying to find deeper meanings in sitcoms and pop albums is kind of funny, not to be taken seriously.
     Of course, maybe Klosterman asked that the WSJ blurb be put on front as a pre-first chapter wink at the reader. Maybe he thinks it's funny that people from high-brow publications take him just as seriously as a blogger with too much free time to stare at book covers.

Where the Girls Are by Susan J. Douglas. (A book I kept referring to as "Where the Girls At?" I had to double-check the title for this review.) An interesting analyzation of girls shaped by the media and feminism, starting in the late '50s and early '60s and ending on the brink of the '90s. It's interesting to read overall, but a lot of the analysis seems blown out of proportion. Were the Beatles really popular because they were androgynous, and girls felt like they could be them? Were certain TV show characters meant to show women how to be subservient? Perhaps, but maybe the Beatles just wrote catchy songs, and TV shows are mindless entertainment. Easy to swallow if taken with a grain of salt. It reminded me a lot of analyzing literature in class - you're sitting there thinking, "Did ____ really include ____ to mean ____? Maybe he just wanted to tell a damn story."
     The historical parts were much more interesting than the pop culture analysis. For someone who wasn't alive during that time, it was fascinating to read about the rallies, struggles, and news coverage that came along with feminism. Douglas has written other books on the topic, picking up from the 1990s where she left off, and I will definitely be reading those to see what she has to say about my generation.

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

My hair is not my friend.

I'm beginning week four of no poo and week two of my transition period.

It started last week, when my hair felt unclean, regardless of time between washings. The top was waxy and gunky, while the ends were dry. In between wasn't tangled, but it was difficult to brush, and felt a lot thicker. Despite all this, my hair looks clean. I usually pull it back to keep from touching it all day, and my bangs look a little clumpy since they're perpetually in the growing-out phase.

There were a lot of variables that had changed that week (such as different shower head, new box of baking soda, different brand of vinegar), so I decided I'd treat it like an experiment, and play around with as much as I could.

+ Brush covered in white, dusty/waxy gunk.
Result: Bought new brush. New brush now covered in white, dusty/waxy gunk. Buy new brush if/when this transition period ever ends.

+ Wash with water only in hopes of rinsing away gunk and hydrating ends.
Result: Looks and feels greasier than if I'd never touched it.

+ Try less baking soda.
Result: I've done this twice now, using about a teaspoon as opposed to a tablespoon. There might be less gunk, but it's not really noticeable enough to make a difference. My hair looks dirty by the 2nd day, though still better than the 2nd day after shampooing.

+ Use vinegar all over, instead of just the ends.
Result: Not too shabby. I started using vinegar on the ends of my hair a week ago, because I read that was how it was supposed to be done. Also, vinegar helps split ends. For the two washes when I only dipped my ends in vinegar, my hair was no longer dry.
     I read online that the gunk on my hair, sebum, might be because there is nothing rinsing away the baking soda. So there's still some residue on my hair and my scalp is producing oils that aren't washing away since I'm not using vinegar up there, also.
     Or something like that. Whatever. I'm trying everything, and rinsing my entire head with vinegar helped a bit. My hair doesn't feel as nasty.

This is only the start of week two of my transition period. They're rumored to last anywhere from two weeks to six months. I cannot do this, people! I'm not the type to give up, except I'm totally the type to give up! If this continues on to week three, I'm going to break. I know I'm going to break. I love not buying and using shampoo, but I just can't live like this! I'm weak, no poo! I'm weak, you'll win! It'll be a shallow victory!

My first two weeks of no poo were heavenly. Doesn't it stand to reason that the first two weeks will always be that way, and I can therefore shampoo for a week or two, then no poo for a week or two, and so on and so on? I don't know how long I can do this…

Monday, February 7, 2011

No Poo.

On Tuesday, February 1st I started the "No Poo" challenge. I am desperately hoping that none of you have any idea what that means and are, at this moment: a little grossed out, a little intrigued, and may or may not have just vomited in your mouth.

It is not a challenge as much as a lifestyle change. "No Poo" means no shampoo. I read about it online and decided to give it a try because I'm sick of washing and blow-drying my hair way too often to be healthy. And yes, I'll admit I partially wanted to try it because I loved the name.

I shampooed my hair last Monday morning. For the record, I usually shampoo every other day. The first day, I'd wear my hair down, but on the second day, it would already be getting a little greasy, so it'd be a ponytail day:
nopoo1
My skin would also feel greasier on the 2nd day. Basically, I felt so gross I should have just wasted the time, effort, and water by shampooing again.

Wednesday I mixed a tablespoon of baking soda with a cup of water, massaged it into my scalp, and rinsed with a tablespoon of red wine vinegar diluted in water. My hair felt heavier, but I blow-dried it without using my usual frizz-control chemical on it, and it looked fine.
nopoo2

On Thursday morning, I didn't wash my hair, I didn't blow dry it to get any extra body, nothing at all. As a result, I had twenty minutes to kill before work and my hair looked like this:
nopoo3
Compare THAT to the 1st pictures.

I washed again Friday morning, just in case my hair got hit by the greasies mid-day. Saturday was a repeat of Thursday's look, but Sunday was a bit messier. Granted, I slept really hard on it the night before, so I would have had to blow-dry it to even attempt to style it. Instead, I swept it into a ponytail, clipped back my bangs*, and was good to go.

*Bangs are the hardest thing about washing or not-washing hair. They flip around the most, they get greasy the fastest, they hang limp while the rest of your hair looks fantastic. I'm growing mine out now, and after having to cut them almost every week because they grew so fast, I'm about four months in and they're just past my eyes. Temperamental bitches.

From the first week I learned that I should probably stick with the every-two-days washing cycle, except on weekends when I don't give a crap about how I look. That's fine with me, because:
- I'm not putting any chemicals in my hair
- my natural color looks better than it ever has
- my hair dries in half the time it used to
- it feels better
- soon I'll be rolling in the money I'll save not buying hair products!

Bring it on, Week Two!