Literary Writing is Rembrandt; Noir Mysteries are Rubik’s Cubes

Sometimes I wonder why people “look down on non-literary writing.” To dismiss such people as literary snobs diminishes them, and at the same time, you diminishes the value of your opinion on the subject of writing. Why do they debase the mystery novel as an art form, as if it were a feeble step-sibling of the writing family. 

Professor's pat answers  - the tried and true response - never explain the problem or get an honest answer. They are repetitions of the Great Wiz, don't look at the man behind the curtain. The Great Oz has spoken, accept it at face value and move on.  Yet it is only through producing a transparent thought  process showing the reasoning to your conclusion, that the conclusion becomes significant and reproducible. By the way, it is the reasoning and logic that a reader performs to solve a mystery that makes that form of literature interesting to the reader and involves them in the story.  The reader's participation makes a mystery superior. 

Still, the fact that "literary snobs" look down on pulp fiction, diminishes the snobs and their opinion, for the reasons cited above. It excludes further discussion, because they post it as accepted fact. I don't accept it. Let's forget them, and discuss the merits of Noir mysteries.  

Each genre has a deserved audience, but the audience reads them for different reasons. Occasionally someone like the wonderfully talented James Lee Burke combines flowery expressive language with a good mystery or thriller plot, but the literary audience probably avoids his writing. They ignore an author that holds two Edgar Awards (for two different detectives.). He creates a world the reader can feel, see and live in, as well as any author. Oh and by the way, as per wikipedia: He taught at five different colleges before getting on the tenure track teaching creative writing at Wichita State University, during the 1980's. Not bad credentials for a mystery writer.  

In literary novels, the milieu and the setting are often the greatest character – augmented by the “emotions” portrayed in the story. “Heathcliff” anyone? Historicals make statements about society and life the way it was. Some literary fiction opines about the way life still is. The audience lives in the past or see the light about today universe from the observer’s position. Inert, inactive, passive. The reader trespasses inside the body of the author - as if the author was a pod from the Invasion of the bodies snatchers, and the reader's soul crept inside that pod for the duration of the book.         

Literary writing excites me the way some Broadway shows equate the scenery to a character. Oh wasn't that scenery fantastic, worth the price of admission ($250), i.e. Phantom of the Opera or Cats comes to mind. Great scenery is not a strike against a well-written play, but should the audience really notice the scenery? How much character arc can a curtain go through during a performance? I think My Fair Lady probes the human psyche more than Phantom, while not needing the support of spectacular visual aids.

In mysteries, the reader comes with an agenda. He or she will solve the problem. Setting and milieu may contribute but it is the humans - the characters - that run the show. The reader gets involved finding clues and making conclusions, as if he or she were turning the sides of a Rubik’s cube to align them. Psychology, motive, emotions are inspected and probed to learn about human nature, and in so doing, solve the crime. The emotions are not on display, but felt by the reader, if the author is talented. 
The journey offers an education in a way that literary fiction could never do. The reader does not sit back and imagine the green velvet of the trees’ leaves swaying in the breeze, over the placid azure lake while Heathcliff rows his paramour to an islet off shore. And he certainly does not wait four pages to see if they might argue or kiss. The reader in a mystery wonders, what does this action mean? Does he really want to kiss her? Get her alone? Why? What will he do?   

In crime fiction, the reader competes to solve the mystery before the detective. The difference in expectations of the literary reader from the noir mystery fan is the difference between watching Pilates and getting out of breath, or doing Peloton and sweating from the workout competing against the unseen people peddling just as hard on their bike. The high from strong exercise, in my opinion, beats the spectator's awe of watching others compete.    

I may be biased, but that is my take on the two genre, and if you want your mind to get fat by sitting inside a literary character body and watching the story happen, that’s find with me. I’ll be pedaling along on the dark road to the unlit house at the top of the hill in a thunderstorm, looking for ghosts and attempting to survive while finding the next clue.

Oh wait, did I just become literary? 

I’ll sit in the corner for ten minutes until this mood passes. I'll be back.   

L.A. Preschel   

Writer explains what is Noir - Oh Really?

A friend and writer I know, Wallace Stroby had a book launching earlier this week. I was lucky enough to attend it. It was held at the Mysterious Bookshop in lower Manhattan. Everyone likes reading a good mystery, so if you get a chance, you should visit the New York City icon that is the Mysterious Bookshop. While you are there, buy Wallace's newest book: Some Die Nameless. Wallace writes noir female protagonists and Wallace writes well. Yay.

At the launch, an off-hand question was inadvertently raised. As I mentioned in a previous post, many successful and educated writers do so by instinct. The have a distorted or poor understanding of how they reach their audience. Their success is inherent to their essence, which is why they cannot teach it to someone else. It comes naturally. However, they succeed very well and very often when they write. We call those types of people "gifted," and they are.

In discussing Wallace's plot, it was posed that a small crime that the non-detective protagonist tries to solve morphs into a crime on a much larger scale. That idea reminded me of those nested Russian dolls. The off-hand question was how does having a small mystery initiate the protagonist's investigation into a contiguous or related crime that is much larger in scope ala Chinatown, the movie.

An author I respect and who has an MFA from a major university answered, "That is what noir is. A small crime that is in some way related to a crime of a major scale, and the detective is draw into solving the larger crime while attempting to solve the lesser one. The protagonists are ordinary people who get in over their heads." While this is an erudite answer, and is partially true - true in the way that all turtles are amphibians, but not all amphibians are turtles. - it is not a definition of noir.

However, defining noir mystery is not an easy task. Most people know it when they see it, but ... oh that is another literary subject.
Here are a few definitions with the link to the source from which they were harvested.

1. From: besthorrornovels.com/noir 
Noir is horror's hardboiled cousin. Noir, meaning black in French, is a subgenre of mystery that explores gritty, urban landscapes with a cynical detective who uncovers dastardly deeds. The darkness of noir is what lends it so perfectly to the horror genre. Both face dark truths that lie under the guise of normalcy. Both deal with outsiders who see the world as it truly is, be that outsider a hardboiled gumshoe or Frankenstein's monster. When Frankenstein's monster becomes the sardonic investigator, noir horror is born. Of course, that's a pretty simplistic view of the genre.

Noir, as a subgenre, did come from the hardboiled detective novels of the 1940's, but an important distinction between the two is that the protagonist does not need to be a detective or investigator. The protagonist can, in fact, be anyone so long as their attitudes match the gritty setting. Noir horror protagonists are notably outsiders who see the ugly truth of the world they live in. The are generally cynical in nature, and have the potential to be destructive either to themselves or others. Frankenstein's monster, without being a hardboiled gumshoe, is a great example of a horror noir protagonist in that he sees the world as evil and heartless and eventually changes to fit this mold. 

The world, or setting, of horror noir could almost be considered a character itself. Squalid, debauched, typically urban settings are common, brimming with forces that are hostile toward the protagonist. This can be anything from a dark, careless city, like Gotham in the Batman comics, brimming with violence and mayhem to supernatural and otherworldly forces that have no use for humanity. Most importantly, the setting should be just as depraved as the characters and the events that unfold around them.

Another important aspect of noir horror is the tone. As its name suggests, this subgenre is relentlessly dark. The tone of works of horror noir is one of despair and suspicion. Themes often center around greed, corruption, oppression, or revenge, and while happy endings in horror are rare, they are particularly hard to come by in the noir genre.

The above transfers to our genre - pure noir mysteries - quite well. 

Here's more.

2. From: merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noir   
Definition of noir: crime fiction featuring hard-boiled cynical characters and bleak sleazy settings an example of classic noir.

3. From: wikipedia.org/wiki/Noir_fiction 
Noir fiction (or roman noir) is a literary genre closely related to hardboiled genre,[1] with a distinction that the protagonist is not a detective, but instead either a victim, a suspect, or a perpetrator. Other common characteristics include a self-destructive protagonist.[2] A typical protagonist of noir fiction is dealing with the legal, political or other system, which is no less corrupt than the perpetrator, by whom the protagonist is either victimized and/or has to victimize others on a daily basis, leading to a lose-lose situation.

I am Back -- the Return of L.A. Preschel

I have been away for quite a while honing my craft - writing. Some might say you cannot teach an old dog new tricks, but I ain't no dog, just old. So here are some old tricks made new.

During my intermission from actual writing -  in the process of learning to write - some of the people I have worked with were very helpful. My present mystery critiquing group tops that list. I have learn significant lessons - not just punctuation or spelling - isn't that what Grammarly and Spell Check are for.  

I have also read a number of books on how to write. Most were written by people, MFA's aside, who prove the point: those who can't do teach. In literature, the corollary to that theory is those who can't write become literary agents. (For the benefit of all my future agents that was solely a cheap joke. Literary agents are chronic readers. We love ya.)

Many books are written about writing by successful writers who prove they have no concept as to why they are successful. Several of the books on writing were written by famous and/or successful authors who could communicate. In that group, the results of their theories and proposals vary from outstanding to awful or obvious. My meaning of awful, in this case, is not a work filling one with awe. Some, such as Sol Stein or Stephen King, actually understood the art of writing and how to communicate it to their reader. The greatest single précis on writing is Sol Stein's Ten Commandments of Writing. The true art in literature is communicating while holding your reader's interest.  

Two types of writing live in this world. One type is concerned with the writer showing how knowledgeable he or she is. These creatures write primarily in "literary novels." Many of these writers have perfected the information dump - similar in value to perfecting a slug dump. The EPA should burn their books, but instead, people crown them with honors. I don't get it.

These authors feel obligated to communicate their superiority to the reader. Plot, pacing, story, character arc, as well as human interest are all secondary to vocabulary and obtuse logic that even the Navajo Code breakers could not decipher. These books become eligible for prizes, including Nobles and such. Their snooty audience gets on a very high horse and declares any one who writes below this level is a hack or worse yet, a "genre" writer, as if that epithet was a pejorative. I would infer from their statements they have never read James Lee Burke who by the way is a college English professor as was Robert B. Parker. Both these genre authors have prose of the highest order, as do many other "genre writers."

I have been in several groups that follow the tenet literature must be exotic, otherwise it's not real writing. If you can understand the manuscript on the first read, it is not literature. They believe real authors write "Literary masterpieces," because that is the only real writing. They worship a false God.

When you write any manuscript, its utility is served by accessibly. It must communicate an idea or story to your reader. Readers want to journey to places that they do not inhabit in their life. They want to feel and know emotions that they cannot allow in their lives without becoming uncivil. They want to identify with a major character in the story, especially if that character is beyond their life's scope. They want to know what drives that character to perform those acts in that way at this time.

The SAT level of the words used to create that journey is as important to the reader as the vehicle a traveler rides in to get to their journey's end. Chevy versus Rolls Royce, who cares, as long as we reach our destination. From inside the vehicle, it is only important to the passenger that the vehicle move toward the goal. Uber, Lift, cab or private car if it gets there, the rider is happy.

If the words are the vehicle, then the story and plot are the scenery. It is the scenery that interests the passenger on his or her journey. Fancy words and incomprehensible sentence structure are the mud on the windows of the vehicle/story. We can't see out the windows unless they are clear, allowing us accessibility to the scenery.

Reading should be an enjoyable avocation/trip to somewhere new. If you have to look up words constantly or imply their meaning from the context perpetually; if you are required to concentrate intensely to find the meaning; if theme is too arcane and occult, and beyond the concept of the reader, then the author has written a text book, not a novel or a story.

I write noir, hard-boiled feminist detective novels, unrepentant, and proud. I have created Samantha Cochran, a woman who left the NYPD as a gold-shield detective, because of a me-too-situation. She has become a female Sam-Spade-style private investigator. Hired as the in-house detective of Allyson Catherine Worthington, Esquire, (Thank you Rex Stout and Nero.) she fights dirty to reach a just end. I hope that really soon, you will have the opportunity to enjoy her first novel length mystery. Check back here to see where and when it is released.

At this time, the Central Jersey Chapter of Sisters in Crime's short story anthology 30 Shades of Dead, has a Sam Cochran/Catherine Worthington story called Thirty Years to Life. It is available through WC Publishing @ www.OnTargetWords.com/WCPublish.

I am L.A. Preschel and I authorized this message - sorry another bad joke.

Every day Feminist - becoming the Best you can be

There is no age limit to becoming the best you can be.

This is demonstrated by the person we recognize today, Shirley Ann Gordon. She was born in Charleston, South Carolina on March 3rd, 1942. She moved to Newark New Jersey in 1967. She passed recently, but I am sure, she is in a better place. And the super senior arrival in her new home, immediately means heaven is on the upgrade. She won't let it be any other way.

Shirley Ann Gordon was a woman of God, and a mother of 10 children. But she wanted to be more.

She became a licensed evangelist and tended to people's spiritual needs. She cared for other so much that she went back to college and received her degree in social work at the age of 66.

She retired from her work to offer aid and volunteered for a new job, supporting the spirits of others at the VA hospital. She was honored by the Mayor of Newark as a "Super Senior," and she certainly was. She was known in her community as "G. Ma."

Not only did she influence her family, the community's children admired her as well. And why not?

As a northern raised white male, I have no understanding of the courage and fortitude it must have taken for a black female in the south in the 1940's and 1950's to maintain any interest in advancement and education. Getting by, surviving was a daily gauntlet to run. Even in the 1960's in Newark, the atmosphere surely was not congenial for a black woman to better herself. Yet, here is the documentation that this spirit overcame the obstacles to achieve. She achieved, not for herself alone, but for the betterment of others.

That is an inspiration in itself. She was known for being outspoken and "telling it like it is." That is the drive that allows you to complete your degree no matter your age or other factors that work against your achievements. She received her college degree at 66 years of age. At that age many people are slowing down, but Shirley was getting revved up.

She is remembered for her love of God, her unique and graceful hats, that accompanied her superbly beautiful dresses. Her presence was felt by the mighty and the minions of America, as demonstrated by Michelle Obama mentioning her on her Twitter page.

In a time when we respect and admire the courage of the famous women celebrities who speak out against abuse, and chauvinistic practices. We should note that every woman can fight this battle in their way. Shirley found her voice in the battle against inequality and bias.  

I have been told by many of my female friends that there are few women over forty-five that have not been put in situations similar to the famous women who have spoken out. They receive inappropriate flirting or requests/demands that are gross, indecent, and illogical. Others were physically assaulted without their consent (rape in any court of law) in a variety of situations beyond their control.

Our culture needs readjustment. We need to respect others, male and female human beings, alike. No human is without merit and talents. No human is lesser than you or greater than you, if you understand God's laws. And I use the word God as all encompassing, because there is no religion in this world that sanctions rape, sodomy and defilement, unless you include Satanism - i.e. that is not a religion, but an anti-religion reactive creation.  

Ego-centric power plays must be made passé, while empowerment of individuals to reach their potential is glorified. The right of every individual to have the control over their person is the most basic of laws. It is inherent in the rights of all humans.

Shirley Ann Gordon is a role model for empowerment. She is an ordinary person who would not be stopped from reaching her goals and serving others. When the world said, you can't, she did.

We cannot praise such a person enough.

-- L.A. Preschel

We did not know ... it sounds so familiar ... the excuse of the self-righteous for not speaking up

I received a post from an acquaintance on Facebook. He said that he has had enough with Harvey Weinstein being in the papers every day. He reasoned we are making Harvey famous, "writing his biography in the mass media." I would say we make him infamous by publicizing his extended felonies. Every time we mention his name we should follow it with, "never again."
The only way to unmask and unempower the boogieman is to display him naked with all his warts exposed - oops I should watch my phraseology - that is figuratively naked, not literally, so Harvey don't get excited.
As to my male acquaintance's comments, I am appalled that a man (a person of the male gender) would put his two cents into the discussion about sexual harassment of women. Which dog in the fight is his? We should never forget Harvey Weinstein, or Andrew Weiner or Bill Cosby or any of the men with position that used that position to harass and molest and rape with impunity.
What is my dog in the fight? I feel a moral duty to "be a man, and do the right thing by any other human." I seek no power for myself; I seek justice for those wronged.
What Harvey Weinstein did and what he represents is of ultimate importance to remember for every American if we want to be true to the Constitution and keep America the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave. It should not take a truly brave person to say, no I won't do that. Freedom of choice is a basic freedom of Americans. Look who they choose and President.
All of America should repeat every morning on waking and every evening on going to sleep, I will not intimidate another human to gratify myself. I will not use others against their will. It is always wrong and shameful. Should a truly ethical and moral person even need to remind themselves of this. But what we have in America today is a lack of morality, replaced by avarice and a need to succeed over the dignity of self. This is not rocket science it is simple human ethics. Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.
Harvey, Bill, Andrew, President Clinton all broke the law without fear of punishment. Yes thank you Cy Vance and all the other D.A. who don't understand the simple term "no." Shame on you and shame on your brethren. I will define no - nyet, non - for you. NO as in stop, don't touch me. I am not consenting to this contact. It may not be in Latin, the language of the Law, but your first language is English correct? No means negatory response to your offer big boy. The flashing red light means stop, do not proceed down this road.  
My acquaintance used the excuse that with so many other causes needing support - the Hurricanes recoveries, and the wild fire victims and black people matters, and our President eroding our freedoms while distracting us with hurricane recoveries, and fire victims and NRA-white supremacists, etc. that we should not put Harvey Weinstein first. Other situations merit our attention more. Really? BTW is it just coincidence that the hurricane in Texas was named ... Harvey.
Getting back to my buddy's statement about other causes are more urgent or first in line. I did not realize that empathy and energy to accomplish moral goals had a cumulative limit. "Oh no. I've no more energy to do the right thing. I'll just ignore evil exists. If I think about Harvey Weinstein, I won't be able to think about Harvey the hurricane's victims. Or the victims of the fires in California. I'm so limited.
I was further appalled, because his Facebook statement received praise and thumbs up from several women we both know - friends in common. I am sure that if any of the women sexually harassed had been their daughters or themselves they would not limit the publicity concerning Harvey Weinstein. Harvey lost his position in the film industry - so freakin' what. His marriage will break up. What marriage, he was screwing around on his wife for 40? years. The first women he harassed through his producer's office represented degradation of every women in America. Objectify one, objectify all.
Why have laws at all, if we enforce them inconsistently, and with an eye toward the felon's wallet.
Today, every male and many women in the film industry claim, "I did not know he was ... "
Yeah, how often have we heard that before. In the worst juxtaposition I can propose, I remember the "good Nazis" at the Nuremberg Trials saying, "I just did my job, I did not know of the exterminations in the camps."
And remember those who could not deny knowing said, they could not speak up for fear of losing ... you fill in the blank. Humans balance risks to themselves with personal gains and make decisions. It is a faulty method to evaluate moral actions.
The expression describing the knowledge of Harvey Weinstein's activities is "it was an open secret in the industry. Harvey was a predator." That makes every agent who sent a poor female alone up to Harvey's hotel suite a pimp who was waiting to claim his fifteen percent of the deal.
Finally brave women spoke out are to be praised, but what took so long. It's like a Greek morality play where the poor flawed hero or in this case heroine is tested by the Gods, put through lengthy trials and finally when his metal is proven, he dies. As a society, we have failed the test. We have chosen poorly. We have chosen selfishly. We have chosen the wrong path.
We are lost.
Not just with sexual harassment, but with racial discrimination and religious prejudice and narcissistic moral decay. Each time we chose the wrong response in reference to another's situation, we bring our personal demise closer, because we all have differences waiting to be exploited.
Our President as an icon represents present day America to a tee, narcissistic, greedy, and without an honest bone in his skeleton.
Why should an actress have to decide between her dream of being a star and her dignity. Why must she sacrifices one for the other.
She should never have to make that choice, especially knowing that in this male oriented society, her word - if she speaks out - may be taken as a lie (self-serving, bitter because she lost the part or etc.). All this while the big honcho's sociopathic lies are considered the truth without questioning. What reason does he have to lie? Everyone, he is a felon. Felons lie to avoid being caught.
Does this scenario ring true on a national level. It was Hitler who said, if you tell a lie, make it a big one, because they are harder to perceive as untrue.  
It is not just in the film industry. Why is Ezekiel Elliot still carrying the football? Hell the professional football players will take a knee to protest Black Lives Matter, but when the black life is a woman's ... oh well, just hand him the ball and let him run for America's team.  
So whenever a woman speaks out against the Harvey Weinstein's and the Bill Cosby's and all the others who use power to obtain their way - think Uber, Fashion, and many other industries - they must be praised as the bravest of warriors. Unless they have it on video tape - think Ray Rice's episode - plus the offender has exhausted his usefulness in his industry (Harvey Weinstein), the women has a even money chance of not being heard or believed.
Susan Fowler is iconic in her courageous unmasking of such activity at Uber. And yet the women on the board when asked to investigate the situation denied such activity occurred on a consistent basis. The section of Uber where Susan was employed started out 25% female and now is 6%, guess a lot of engineers got pregnant and took maternity level together, but it was not from their supervisors. We swear.
The women who were asked to "clear Uber" show that avarice knows no gender. How can a stockholder or even an Eric Holder be objective in the face of millions of dollars.
So for all you fans of feminist rights, remember this phrase you are going to hear it so often in the future.
I DID NOT KNOW THAT (You fill in the blank) WAS DOING THAT.
Ignorance is bliss.
To advocates of Black Lives Matter: I DID NOT KNOW THAT RACIAL PROFILING REALLY EXISTS.
Forty years from now, the time era from 2000 to 2025 will be know as the dumb ass era, because nobody knew nothing about anything that was going on except as it happened to them. Every one is a moron who only smartens up when it is their ass on the line. Take that any way you want.
Every known story of sexual harassment should be repeated in every newspaper, every day for the next five years. You tell these stories to your daughters, forewarned is forearmed. "I don't know" is unacceptable and "never forget" is the operative motto. Always beware because society will not defend you, you are on your own.

Women need to resist the power plays of men when it is against the woman's better interest, and in that rare situation where it is a man that is being intimidated by the power of another that man must have the strength and the will to act in his best interest too. Resist the manipulation and become a hero or heroine. Every human deserve the respect they demand. Demand your respect everyday.

-- L.A. Preschel

Not Every leader is Famous

In 1971, Judith Schffler broke ground in corporate America. She passed from this earth near the end of September 2017, but the repercussions of her achievement will last longer than her time on earth.
She may not be famous in the obvious sense of the word, but she pioneered change in the way corporations in America think about female employees. Her talent forced A.T. & T's to promote her to a position of authority.
Judith was born in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania in a time when most teenage girls in American high schools concentrated on home-ec(nomics) courses. Many people - men and women - thought a female went to college to earn not a B.A. but her Mrs. As if that were the crowning achievement for a female. We know such limitations are just B.S. Those letters represent another degree, women of the 1950's and 60's were not expected to earn in college, but Judith had other ideas.
From Canonsburg High School Judith matriculated to the Carnegie Institute of Technology - now called Carnegie Mellon University. She earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Technical Writing and Electrical Engineering. Women engineers in the 1960's were rarer than five-legged camels wandering Madison Square Park.  
In 1965, Judy found a job at A.T. & T. Bell Laboratory. During her employment at Bell Labs, she earned a Master of Science degree in Computer Sciences. She also found time to raise two daughters.
Her management of her time and her education must have impressed the powers that be, because in 1971, she became one of the first female supervisors at Bell Labs.
But that was just the first line to be crossed by Judith.
In 1989, A.T. & T. promoted her to an executive position. Maybe a male who had demonstrated her level of knowledge and talent would have been promoted up the ladder faster, but Judy was an undeniable force that broke through the barrier of sexual bias to achieve the impossible. She was named Chief Information Officer and Vice-President of a large business unit of Lucent Technologies.
Subsequently, she was offered early retirement, when corporate consolidation was under way in 1998.
She took advantage of the offer to retreat from the pressures of work. She lived in Maine and Florida, and maintained a home in Delaware.
In 2004, Judith Scheffler authored an edited collection of essays concerning the challenges a pioneering female executive faced in the male dominated corporate environment, "Beyond the Corner Office," is a history and an memoir and an autobiography of sorts, but mostly, it is a road map disclosing the potholes that threaten to unseat a feminist corporate administrator on her ride to the corner office.
Those who do not know the history of their environment, are doomed to repeat the mistakes and slip into all the potholes on the journey. Judith's legacy is to point them out so they can be avoided. When I was training to be a surgeon, I was often told know your enemies, meaning know where the danger and complications lie in the surgical field. I would offer that advice to any executive on the raise, and Judith describes a whole bunch of enemies that block the way for female executives.

She remains an unknown, unsung feminist pioneer to most, but now she is known to you.

-- L.A. Preschel

Feminism is the right to reach your full potential - no matter the field of play

Feminism is about women being allowed to reach their full potential and enrich the universe with their unique abilities. There should be no qualifications, asterisks, or separate but equal denotations as it relates to opportunities and accomplishments in this world.
Man, woman and child as long as they are not endangering themselves should be allowed to compete on the highest level to show their talent. Some would say even self-protection does not deter a true feminist like Joan of Arc.
How can someone show their greatness unless they are tested to the point of failure or ultimate success, vanquishing all their competition. Contesting against the best, brings out your best and shows who is the best. That is what the Olympics are about. That is what life should be about.
No artificial man-made limits to protect/advantage selected competitors to the detriment of others. Darwin did not propose a theory that in a natural state, only the strongest win, and the weaker shrink to the sidelines, becoming extinct.
Deanna Guzman already has won the state championship in the shot put, so she has proved she is a top-level athlete. Guzman who describes herself as a geeky book reader, is also a role model.
This fall as a high school senior she has tried out for and made her high school's football team. It is not the flag football team, but the "boy's" football team. She not only made it through the rigorous training camp, running laps like any player when she made a mistake, but she is a starting offensive tackle. On the record, multiple male teammates respect her as an athlete, not as a female athlete, but as a peer.
Kamil Vickers a 300 pound tackle on her team stated, "she is not afraid to get hit or to mix it up. ... She's like a ball of energy. That's the kind of thing teams need nowadays."
Deanna stands 5-foot-8 and weighs 205 pounds. She can bench press 150 pounds. She earned her starting position and she earns mention in this blog. She is a pioneering woman, breaking new ground  for women. High school records show that Deanna is the first female to make a varsity "boy's" football team in New Jersey as an on the field player.  
Her coach noted that because of Deanna, several other female students have told him they are thinking about trying out next year. Alexis Littlejohn (14 years-old) has told the coach she was inspired by Deanna, and she will definitely be at tryouts next year.
Deanna has become a leader/role model outside her school as well.
In Pop Warner Football in Newark, several girls are now playing on "boy's" teams. Many are starting and they are recognized by their teammates as playing at the high level needed to win games. Quite a few of them have heard of Deanna and look forward to walking in the path she is clearing.

In one obvious difficult parental situation, 12 year-old Madison Jacobs, played against her younger brother, Javon Swain (10) in a Pop Warner game, but then aren't brothers and sisters always fighting and tackling each other. I feel sorry for Mom, Avia Jacobs, who has to play referee on the ride home from the game. A tie satisfies no one, but sure would decrease the acrimony before eating dinner.

Back to Deanna, she has had to overcome more than just gender bias to be the athlete she is. On her 13th birthday, while walking to school, she was struck by a speeding car. She suffered multiple fractures, some of which required open reductions and internal fixations. She had a rod inserted in her femur (the bone between the knee and hip joints) and wires were used to hold the bones about her shoulder to the rest of her arm. After she healed sufficiently, she needed extensive physical therapy to relearn how to walk. She needed to strengthening and to regain motion to return her arm to full function. Imagine how hard she worked so that now she can play football or bench press 150 pounds.
She became the state champion in the shot put and a starting tackle on her football team.
If she never does anything else in her life (and I would not bet against that) she is already a very special person. She is a leader and a success story.
Deanna is a pretty stylish, athletic geek. She reads books on brain function and urban communities's socioeconomic conditions and how they affect young people. Like I said earlier, I won't bet against her changing the world in the future, nope, not me.
She has figured out a part of the puzzle who is Deanna Guzman.  She knows whom she wants to be and she is in the process of becoming that person - using her unique talents.
She is a winning feminist.

-- L.A. Preschel  


Sourced from an article "Girls tackle football and the rest is history," by Barry Carter for the Newark Star-Ledger 03 October 2017