#tried to be short but all my jokes are like extremely contextual so its hard to get enough context for them to make sense

[man-destroyer]

tell us about ancient spanish?

Yeah!

so. In the beginning of my comic (I'm assuming you havent read it, if you have I'm sorry) the main character is getting established as sort of a "master bullshitter" and very lucky. He's not stupid, the reason he's alive is because he reads situations quickly and lies very well... and at this point my editor had been repeatedly treating him with this sort of bumbling idiot trope, so I was already a bit frustrated.

He's caught as a stowaway on a pirate ship, and is bullshitting a treasure hunt so the pirates keep him alive long enough that he could escape. So, he makes a fake treasure map in Spanish, hoping that the pirates won't know any... because if they can just kill him and take the map, they will. And one of them knows Spanish!

So, the joke I put in to resolve the situation (which I kept) was "but can you READ Spanish?" where he's banking on the pirate's illiteracy, and he lucks out because she can't read.

but my editor wanted him to say "but do you know... ancient spanish?" which makes no sense and isnt funny LMAO to me.

There were a lot of instances like this, but this is the one I remember the most because my editor like. argued with me on putting ancient spanish in there... It was a back and forth for a good bit.

[alwaysspeakshermind]

Top 5  Anti-Varchie Arguments & Why They Make No Sense

#4: “Varchie’s boring/predictable, love at first sight is so cliché(d).”

Love at first sight is so clichéd? Okay, sure, I’ll allow that.

I’ll even agree.

But think contextually for a sec: love-at-first-sight is so clichéd as opposed to what? The utterly original, never-been-done-before uniqueness of best-friends-to-lovers that Barchie and also Bughead, why do people who say they want to see a friends-to-lovers relationship keep forgetting Bughead’s in that category? represents? The novel concept of enemies-to-lovers that is Cheryl/Toni (and Veggie if you squint)? The dated-in-the-past-but-sparks-still-fly (Falice, Tom Keller/Sierra McCoy, Fred/Hermione) or misunderstood-outsider-falls-in-love-with-“perfect”-America’s Sweetheart (Bughead, and also Kevin/Joaquin, Kevin/Fangs)? 

Come on.

Whether it’s your cup of tea or not, a trope is a trope is a trope. There are only so many combinations possible when it comes to romantic dynamics, and since fiction and reality have both existed for a really long time, there’s no one trope that hasn’t already been done a million times over. So…what’s the point of harping on this particular one? Or any other trope just because it’s not your personal favorite?

Yes, Love At First Sight is the bread-and-butter of many fairytales and/or Disney movies. But it’s by no means alone in that regard. 

Best friends/childhood friends-to-lovers has been a longtime staple of books, TV shows, rom-coms, and musicals (Harry Potter, Kim Possible, 13 Going On 30, Phantom of the Opera, and Lion King all say hello), and so has enemies-to-lovers (27 Dresses, The Proposal, You’ve Got Mail, Tangled, etc.). I’m not even going to bother touching on the sparks-still-fly/loner-loves-”good” kid thing, because the first is the golden goose for Hallmark, Lifetime, an a billion-and-one romance novels, while the second is YA fiction in a nutshell. And if you’re one of those “I can’t help it, friends-to-lovers is my crack” kind of people, it might be worth noting that “Love At First Sight” is plenty of other people’s crack. Also, if your complaint against a trope you find overused is a valid argument, so is someone else’s. Childhood-best-friends-to-lovers may feel newer and unique to you, but it doesn’t to everyone. Some people are as tired of it as you are of Love At First Sight. 

And even if your claim is that “love at first sight’s not realistic/there’s like zero basis for it in the real world/it’s the exception not the rule,” that claim also extends to Childhood Best-Friends-To-Lovers and Enemies-To-Lovers. 

In the real world, the Best-Friends-To-Lovers thing is about as common as Love At First Sight, with the latter maybe being a bit more common, since the overwhelming majority of people tend to notice attraction within the first fifteen minutes of meeting someone and the overwhelming majority of childhood best friends grow up thinking of each other as a sibling. (Important distinction: when childhood best friends do grow up, fall in love and get married, they don’t tend to take until high school/college to figure out how they feel. They’re typically aware of it from puberty/slightly before puberty onward, and it doesn’t change because they already know everything there is to know about that person...they know if they’re attracted to them; they know if they’re not.) And both those tropes are more common in everyday life than enemies-to-lovers since, in truth, most people don’t want to have anything to do with the antagonistic person who made their life miserable.

So realism/unrealism? Kind of a shifting-sands argument. Especially within the context of a show that puts an ex-“gang” member in as sheriff and deputizes other “gang” members, one of whom is named Sweet Pea, of all things. I mean, if you truly feel morally obligated to reality-police Riverdale, there are far more pressing issues than the likelihood of two teens meeting each other one time and deciding within five minutes that “This is The One” (which is not even how it happens except for Archie, but still).

What it really comes down to is not the trope itself, but how well the trope is executed. 

In other words, it’s not what you’re given...it’s what you do with what you’re given. Every trope has been done many times before. Like it or not, that is an undeniable fact. Arguing that something has little-to-no value purely on the basis of its commonality is in essence weighting originality (theory) over style (practical application). To illustrate why this kind of thinking is a critical mistake, let’s put it this way: weighting originality over style is like saying Riverdale Season 3 is better than Riverdale Season 1. 

...Which, as even the most casual of Riverdale viewers knows, is not the case.

Is S3 more ambitious than S1? Yes. Does S3 contain more jaw-dropping plot twists than S1? Absolutely. Are there some damn fun episodes in S3? For sure. But guess what? S3 also contains far more plot holes, inane plot “twists” and contradictory developments/sheer why-are-you-trying-to-make-fetch-happen-with-this-storyline moments because S3 goes so hard for shock value/the unexpected, that it effectively lapses on execution and winds up with a more creative, but ultimately less-compelling finished product than S1. Moral to the story? Creativity is good, but devotion to creativity at the exclusion of all else is not. If a few predictable elements aren’t mixed into an unpredictable world (or vice versa), everything ceases to shock. On Riverdale, because things are always so wild, the biggest surprises are usually when things unfold normally/don’t go haywire.

Now.

Me personally, I’ve shipped every trope at least once. I’m in the habit of making myself set aside all preconceived notions when beginning a new show/book/movie, because I never know what, if any, ship I’ll go for. Historically, I’m about 50-50 on Childhood-best-friends-to-lovers—sometimes I love it, sometimes I hate it. Enemies-to-lovers—usually, I dig it, sometimes it’s a big, fat no from me, dawg. Love At First Sight however, I am overwhelmingly prejudiced against. And when I say overwhelmingly prejudiced, I mean that as a rule, I flat-out hate it. I find it stupid. It annoys me. I roll my eyes and make jokes.

But, here I am. Writing a bunch of long-ass Tumblr posts in defense of a fictional relationship that makes a direct play on the Love At First Sight trope.

So why are Archie and Veronica my huge exception? 

Well, for one thing, their relationship kicks off in a manner that is highly evocative of the comics. The instant Archie sees Veronica, all of time (for him) stands still. The one solitary thing he’s aware of from the moment she steps into Pop’s and he looks up is her. No matter what he’s doing, he ends up looking at her, and after a very short amount of time, the same goes for Veronica (though of course, she tries to play it cool). Regardless of how I feel about the cheesiness of the trope, the execution of the scene is fricking cute.

For another: it actually is an unusual trope, and I was surprised to see it used. 

Don’t get me wrong, the whole see-a-person-across-a-crowded-room deal is a cliché and it’s a million percent been done to death. But the funny thing is, Love At First Sight is such a clichéd cliché that it’s hardly ever used nowadays. By virtue of its extreme clichédness in fact, it has accidentally and ironically become fresh again because the second someone suggests it, someone else inevitably goes, “Nah, that’s too clichéd, we can’t do that.” In all honesty, I can’t remember one TV show or non-90s-Disney movie I watched in the last ten years where that trope was used over any/all of the other tropes available. I actually intended to make a list of the books/movies/shows I know of that have used the friends/enemies to lovers trope for comparison purposes, but it was getting so long with just the books section I ended up going, “Haha, no,” and scrapped that plan. (But for the record, almost every single Jane Austen novel is on that list.)

So, in summary: Love At First Sight clichéd? Yep. For sure.

Too clichéd?

Nope.

Certainly no more, and arguably less, than the other tropes Riverdale’s many ships adhere to. So if you’re not nonstop complaining about those other ships on the basis of the overdone/predictability factor, it shouldn’t be an issue that Varchie’s relationship is built around a recognizable trope that has been out-of-use by most everyone except Disney for a good while now. (Besides, some tropes are considered timeless for a reason.) 

And seriously, if we’re going to go down the Disney path, let’s stop a second and recall how many Disney Channel shows/movies in the last decade utilized Best-Friends-To-Lovers and Enemies-To-Lovers. Or hey, what about Nickelodeon shows? Or  maybe cop/CSI/civil service-type shows where best friend partners/partners who hate each other eventually fall in love?

Again, a relationship is not automatically made “boring” because it falls within the parameters of a well-known trope, and “predictable” does not automatically mean “bad.” If that were truly the case, no fictional relationship from probably the 18th century onward would have any popularity and/or critical acclaim. And if you try to argue that that’s just how it is for you personally: predictable/clichéd = boring, you should probably keep in mind that when measured by those standards, every single other ship on Riverdale is, by definition, boring. 

Every.

Single.

One.

Not just Varchie. 

So if you really are passionate about Riverdale not focusing on a “boring, predictable, clichéd ship instead of an interesting one,” you might want to take a break from griping about Archie and Veronica and start examining exactly how original those "interesting” ships you’re touting actually are. And if that’s not really what you mean, if you don’t really buy into the line you’re selling (i.e., you’re just using “they’re so boring” as an excuse to disguise the fact that you don’t like Varchie because they prevent your preferred ship from happening), you might also want to consider just being honest about that. 

Because when you build your argument around a point that encompasses more relationships than just the one you’re criticizing, it makes you look like you’re either extremely clueless in not realizing that your complaint also applies to your ship/other ships, or else a giant hypocrite.

[docmurph12]

Ok review time. And remember, there is no war in Ba Sing Se.

My next request comes from my very good friend. The last time he and I sat down and tried to watch this was after we cleared through every episode of the animated series this movie was based on. We didnt get through ten minutes. So this was a fun, frustrating challenge. For those noticing, yes this is a retroactive review, instead of a "live" one. Reason for this is that as a fan it would be really difficult to be as objective as possible (given I already know this thing to be really bad) if I was distracted.

So what I know going in is that Shyamalan had a couple big flops and that he picked out this series to be his resurrection, thinking going the large scale epic route would be beneficial to his career. What happened was a ruthlessly infamous flop that resulted in nearly 6 years of silence, jokes, and memes prior to "Split" bringing Shyamalan back to relevance again.

First of all, this film could literally have been directed by anyone. Looking back at my review for Aladdin, I recall saying that I was shocked to find out it was directed by Guy Richey, because all of his hallmark signatures were missing. Same story here; The Last Airbender feels like a basic level cookie cutter epic filmmaking school project. Everything that makes a Shyamalan film is gone, which is crazy because the levity that makes ATLA (the acronym I'll use for the show going forward) is gone too. I have always said that as a director your job is to take what is written (which in this case was written by Shyamalan as well) and use your style to create a visual aspect that compliments the story told by the dialogue and events. Think of this writer/director relationship like one in comics between the writer and the artist. The artist is selected because stylistically he matches what is needed for the story. Great example of a good match is Sin City (picked because of loudness of its specific style). That story doesnt get told the same way or with the same impact with different color palettes, camera work, or actor direction. The Last Airbender is missing everything that gives a person a reason to select a specific director, especially one known for work in small scale supernatural thrillers.

The writing is.....super bad. There are a couple simple tools I like to use to identify if a film has scripting issues as opposed to anything else. First, is the dialogue done in a way that feels contextually natural? Do real people talk this way or is it written like shlockey, overly dramatic stage dialogue (think the Star Wars prequel trilogy)? Second, how easy is the story to follow? Are there gaping plot holes? Is it subtle with a good surprise? Does it hit you in the face with a story shovel with a handle made of heavy handed expositional dialogue?

Lastly, how hard are the actors trying to act around your script? Is it a good film where great performances outweigh poor to middling dialogue (Batman V Superman), or is it Bloodrayne? I've said enough on that, you get the point. That said, I am not sure the actors could have been saved by a better script. The cast was very poorly selected. Insensitive at worst (though I genuinely think the brown dude that insisted on the specific and coincidentally white folk he picked probably DIDN'T have a whitewashing agenda given what he said prior to release), out of touch with the source material at best, picking the virtual unknowns that he did really didnt pan out for him. The kid cast as Aang (pronounced AAng, goddamnit, not ONG, more on that later) got the role because he looks like the character, kind of, and only had a week of acting school worth of experience prior to filming the movie. Let's just say it definitely showed.

I am not sure TOTALLY crucifying the cast is entirely fair, so let's move the witch hunt to almost everything else. There is some good though, I promise so hang in there.

I really hope the editor got sent back to school. The purpose of editing is to make a cut that not only maintains but heightens interest in what you are watching. Cutting the fat in order to get to the point while not giving the movie away. Sometimes that means giving more than a 90 minute cut (which Shyamalan has taken at least partial responsibility for in this case) in order to preserve the story. There are scenes where the continuity from one cut to the next doesnt match up. Like consecutive cuts in one scene with massive distances traveled between cuts and even in at least one case a partial or complete costume change. It's extremely jarring. Something else about cuts--generally you cut to another angle or scene because the film requires you to in order to display more information that you wouldn't get in one single long cut. Usually a film has choppy cuts in it because the scene requires an character to do something the actor can't, or because the director or editor are bad at their job. The story, or sometimes in lucky cases just one scene, suffers as a result of bad or needless cuts. This is the case here. The strange thing is there are truly WONDERFUL long cuts of fight scenes that really suck you in, but the wierd juxtaposition between great non-editing and strange and bad editing really kicks you in the head. Enough on that. On to the next.

I did NOT see this movie in 3d. I understand that the conversion was really bad, but that said what I CAN speak to is the VFX. This film, with the exception of the lighting, was pretty well put together in terms of effects. There were really only a couple issues that were glaring in terms of VFX, but by and large it wasnt awful. There are definitely newer films that look worse. In standard. I dont know about 3d.

I think the thing that makes this film more frustrating than anything is that there are things about this movie I love. They are few and far between, but I really do love them. The intro was a really neat callback to the series intro to each episode. Then the movie happens. Then, the flying bison appears!! Then more movie. Then, a scene where Aang (not Awng) uses the glider in his staff. Then more movie. Then, all the practical martial arts, then, yet more movie. It's like this the entire way. Best comparison here? Green Lantern. It's like the Shyamalan said, "Hey, I like this and need a career boost.", then proceeded to cherry pick things from a beloved series and then ham and egged a movie with a confusing plot that absolutely requires you to be super familiar with the source material. There are a lot of assumptions made by characters in the movie that made sense given background provided by the show, but make absolutely none if you are going in blind. "Those are air bending tattoos, and I think he might be the avatar, despite he fact that I havent seen him bend anything and airbenders havent even been seen in over 100 years! Before my time!" Fucking come on. Throw the newcomers here a bone man.

The long story short here is I guess in spite of the casting decisions, editing, and direction, a good script could have made at least a fun movie. This movie should not have made it past script in the form we all saw it though, and it makes one wonder how much pressure was on everyone involved (almost all of it internally applied, Shyamalan did this project almost entirely on his own volition and cast a bunch of almost unknowns with the exception of maybe Cliff Curtis, so of course they said yes) to join in and take part in this without asking questions. Its upsetting to know the original showrunners were as ostracized as they were on this thing.

I dont see myself going back. Yes there were things that made me smile a little, but the film as a whole is so overwhelmingly bad in the face of those things it is just not worth it. I AM however going to go and rewatch the series with my wife and the kids for their first time, and maybe as a result of having to sit through this war crime of a film adaptation.

Final Verdict? I give it a D-. Purely out of respect for the very small handful of things I did appreciate. Next up?? The Lobster. Really looking forward to that one.

[tastebudstalk-blog1]

Sweet Spot Sunday

Today, we met with Quasia Elle.  She chose a spot that wasn’t exactly easy to find, but what a diamond in the rough.  I gifted her a pocket sized journal that I wrapped in pink tissue paper.  I concluded pink was her favorite color based on her Tumblr and hoped my lurk skills didn’t fail me now.  Dressed in all black with a camouflage dad hat that read A Tribe Called Quest, I must admit her presence made me nervous.  It’s not anything she said or did, but as awkward as she was looking for me without much needed corrective lenses, she presented a confidence I hadn’t experienced in awhile.  

TB:  Where did you get your hat from?  Supa fly.

Quasia Elle:  If I tell you, I have to kill you.  And killing you after you’ve given me this awesome gift is just rude (laughs). 

TB: So, why this place?

Quasia Elle: I have a serious sweet tooth.  Like, I should probably go to some sort of addictions counseling, but there’s so much comfort and peace in bake shops and great quality desserts.  The Little Cupcake Bakeshop is no different.  It took awhile, but I finally found a place that offers icing as good as the cake.  I had to bring you here.  There’s also an amazing bookstore right next door, You shouldn’t visit one without the other.

TB: What book(s) are you currently reading?

Quasia Elle: I always reference Think and Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill when I feel myself slipping.  It’s a guidebook about the manifestation of money.  An ex’s mom blessed me for Christmas a few years ago, literally changed my life.  I’m also reading a witty, biography/ reference book by Anne Lamott called Bird by Bird.  This was suggested by an English teacher I met on a bus from upstate to NYC.  Great read for writers, specifically.  What are you reading?

TB: I tend to continuously go back to A Rose That Grew From The Concrete by Tupac.  The more my knowledge of Black American history and Hip Hop expands, the more I feel I understand him and can carry out his primary messages for the culture.  My current read is The Jungle by Upton Sinclair.  This one is contextually accurate considering Trump’s beef with immigrants.  If you’ve read this book, I just gave a top ten pun of the year (laughs).

Quasia Elle:  Oh my God, I’m coming out of the ocean because you need to stop (laughs).  The Jungle is one of my favorite books of all time.  Gave a book report about it in AP Literature in high school.  Thinking back on it, I amazed myself at how well I articulated certain things from a book that wasn’t read all the way through at the time. 

TB: What do you suggest for me to try, considering this is my first time here?

Quasia Elle: I’m a creature of habit, so probably the wrong one to suggest, BUT, i’m confident in this spot enough to say, Russian roulette!  You’ll be fine (laughs). The classics, vanilla bean and red velvet, are really good, and I’ve heard good things about the unorthodox of blue velvet and princess dream.  Mad cute.  Logically speaking, you don’t want to pay $3 for one cupcake, but it’s Brooklyn.  When in Rome...

TB: When did your sweet tooth addiction start?

Quasia Elle:  I’ve always enjoyed sweets, my Mee-Mee has a bunch of traditions that include them especially during the holidays.  But when I realized I had no self control was while studying for finals at Alabama.  I bought a dozen of Krispy Kreme donuts, juiced up on espresso, and found myself finishing 12 donuts in 6 hours.

TB: That sounds eventful.  Would you say you have any other addictions?

Quasia Elle:  Does being in love count?

TB:  Elaborate.

Quasia Elle:  They say chocolate and love release similar endorphins.  Whatever chemically happening, correlating the two, I lose my shit over.

TB: Are you in love right now?

Quasia Elle:  I am.  Although we’re separated, he will always deserve my love.  He’s one of the best human beings I’ve ever met.  For the sake of my productivity, I can’t dwell in the confusion of it all.  What’s meant to be, already is.

TB: What do you mean by confusion?

Quasia Elle:  I think that deep down, we all know exactly what we want to do with love.  Whether that’s moving in together, or simply asking someone out on the first date.  But, we choose to sit in confusion, wasting time, thinking God is going to visit us in our dreams to say, “Now’s the time Daniel.”  It just doesn’t happen that way.  You have to take control of your own life and pray God provides the resources, standing as confirmation.  Take a chance on your happiness, being scary only limits your life experiences.

TB: Would you say these are unhealthy addictions?  Sweets and love?

Quasia Elle: An addiction is unhealthy in its form by definition.  Too much of anything can kill you, so yes.  They’re extremely unhealthy.  But I fast them, amongst other things, to keep myself in check and aligned with God.

TB:  You mind talking about God?  You’ve referenced Him twice in a row.

Quasia Elle:  Because that’s my best friend, go best friend (laughs).  What is it you want to know about our relationship exactly?

TB: Well, how do you know He’s real and what religion do you identify with?

Quasia Elle:  Because I see Him in you, this moment.  I see Him in my family and friends that never let me fall, and the only thing that has kept me from leaving this world prematurely, or before His calling, is Him. I don’t necessarily identify with a religion, per-say, but I have a tattoo that says “Israelite”.  I don’t believe in Jews and Gentiles in physical form, everything is spiritual to me.  So, as an Israelite, spiritually, I fight and prevail with God.  That’s the biblical definition for how Jacob was renamed Israel after his fight with an angel for his blessing.

TB: What would you say to an Atheist? 

Quasia Elle:  Well, like my Mee-Mee told me, “If judgement day comes and this is all a hoax I have nothing to lose.  But if that day comes and this is in fact real, and I chose not to believe in anything, I have EVERYTHING to lose.”  Stay thirsty my friends.

TB: Speaking of grandparents, they definitely grew up in a time period quite different from ours.  They seem more in tune with family, nature, the “simpler things”, if you will.  Why do you think this generation lacks those appreciations?

Quasia Elle:  We have a lot more distractions, a lot more falsely prioritized, priorities, if that makes any sense.  A lot of us have anxiety after we post a photo, a short fused superficial gratification.  It’s just not healthy for anyone’s mental or emotional state.  But we keep going back.  It’s an abusive relationship.  While we’ve advanced in areas like medicine and communication because of it, I think we’ve also fallen short the same way.

TB: Are you making a general statement that millennials are pieces of shit? 

Quasia Elle:  (laughs) I mean, that’s unfair because there are always exceptions to any rule.  You do have people balancing the real world and the matrix, very healthily.  I’m just saying it’s extremely hard to find, myself included.  I study my Twitter feed.  I’m not being creepy, but majoring in Psychology starts odd habits.  I see how people talk to and about one another, how everyone’s defense mechanism is inhumanly joking or being angry.  And the more you submerge yourself in it, the more you take on that energy.  I swear I hate going on social when tragic events have happened.  It’s disheartening.  We lack kindness and community, something generations before us had to have because of societal and political reforming.  We’re spoiled.  Trump is the first negative impact we have to directly deal with as adults, like seriously.  That’s not just a millennial trait though, people are screwed up.  But, you have this entity, the Internet, that just harnesses, and provokes this dark energy.  And it’s hard to pull away from.  It’s a Siren (if you guys are familiar with Mythology).  It’s mad scary.     

TB: You said you went to UAB?

Quasia Elle:  This is your second time trying to die during this interview (laughs).  I went to THE University of Alabama.  Roll Tide.

TB:  What does that mean?

Quasia Elle: Literally anything you need it to mean.  YouTube the ESPN Roll Tide commercial, circa 2010.

TB:  How was your college experience there?

Quasia Elle:  The best moments and accomplishments of my life.  I attended a small school before I transferred there though, Clayton State University.  But, it wasn’t enough of an experience for me.  I used to watch those corny 90′s- 00′s movies that were located on big campuses, How High is my all time favorite reference for that.  I claimed something I wanted, and my experience was exactly what I thought it would be like.  Not to mention I met lifelong friends that have the illest Birmingham accents.  I love country dialect.        

TB: One last question... what is your definition of success, as if you’re speaking to someone who looks up to you or someone simply looking for guidance?

Quasia Elle: Success is happiness and financial freedom, by the standards of your lifestyle.  It’s one hundred and ten percent subjective.  Be practical, first and foremost.  You have bills to pay, please don’t relinquish good standing in credit by the notion of “for the art.”  Even if you’re couching it somewhere I pray you have a safe box with 50% of your savings, the other 50 is in a savings account that is extremely easy for you to deposit, but difficult to withdraw from.  Write out your goals, a million times over until your spirit is so drawn to what you’ve manifested, that you truly understand sacrifice to get it.  And be conscious of the time.  As Ray Lewis said, “How much time you gone waste?  Every decision you make you gotta ask, does this decision influence where I’m ultimately trying to go?”  

TB:  Well then, Roll Tide.

Quasia Elle ordered a red velvet cupcake and homemade vanilla ice cream.  I tried the personal cheesecake.  We talked a bit more about politics, sports, her tiny home obsession, and this library she’s building in hopes of dramatically dying by her right of knowledge like in Fahrenheit 451.  How she wants to make sure her nephew doesn’t end up in prison like his father, and how being the best of every title is her goal.  She takes extreme pride in being a sister, (best) friend, daughter, cousin, employee, employer, and wherever else she can find purpose by service.  She truly believes she is only placed here to service other people, and in that finds extreme happiness.  She also mentioned that her mother is in need of a second kidney transplant, so although a huge request to ask, if anyone is willing or knows of someone willing, please reach out.

She is a timid spirit, yet full of hope and laughter.  She has experienced traumatic pain, but somehow finds her way back to the surface.  Her current works include a blog that “redefines success and highlights vulnerability to create a culture of healing and healers.”  She titles it Taste, Buds and I’m excited to see where she goes in her writing career and encourage others to watch, support, and reach out to her as well.    

The Little Cupcake Bakeshop is located in Brooklyn, at 9102 3rd Ave.  There are other locations, but this was the one specifically chosen.  It’s open late, 11pm,  for that “late night fix” and I quote our addict.