2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

I am a self-employed photographer and graphic artist. During this difficult time, many of my clients have tightened their expenditure budgets, and I have certainly noticed the difference. I think the keys for artists in this economy are to:

1. Be better businesspeople. Artists' weaknesses are often that they aren't business-savvy. Now is a perfect time to ramp up your business through smart marketing and promotion (this doesn't have to cost much money at all). Also, finding ways to be more efficient in your projects, thus increasing your bottom line on each project.

2. Improve your skill set. To be more competitive, we are required to always improve our skills in our field. With the extra time we have from a slow economy, we have an opportunity to grow as artists. You can take some time to attend art gatherings to network, research a different style of art, or teach yourself a new skill like Flash animation or videography.

K.R. Newell
www.keengraphics.net
www.plateauphotography.net

posted 4 years, 2 months ago
view in context

I agree, 100%. "Feeling healthy" when you are quite obviously obese is merely self-delusion. Being realistic and taking personal responsibility are the only ways to begin to solve the problem.

posted 4 years, 9 months ago
view in context

I'll admit it: I'm am a bit of a fat-a-phobe.

I think my assumptions about fat/obese/overweight people are subconscious and automatic. I assume they have no self control, little self respect, low self esteem, and cannot possibly be truly happy. These are all unattractive characteristics to me, and though they inspire empathy, they do not inspire socialization with the individual. Maybe I need to try to change my subconscious assumptions, and I've tried, but it seems most fat people I connect with actually DO display the characteristics I assume to be true.

Don't get me wrong. I don't call people names or curl my lip or anything. I respect the humanity of all people, regardless of race or weight or gender. It's just that these assumptions exist in my head, and certainly color my interaction (or lack thereof) with obese strangers.

There have been times in my life when I have been heavier than I'd like, which for me is around 160 lbs (I'm 5'8"), but I always look at myself at that point, and think, "I need to make some changes." I take responsibility for my weight and my health. I don't make excuses, and I don't continue destroying my body. We all find ourselves out of control from time to time, but personal responsibility is key. I have a friend who is definitely overweight. She just made the choice to take responsibility. She works hard to lose weight, and has made a plan to keep it off. She is not making excuses, and so far she's lost 18 lbs. I respect that.

Finally, I find it amusing and a bit absurd that Americans are so wealthy that we can first of all AFFORD to get so fat, and then spend MORE money on diets and gym memberships to reverse the fruits of our excesses. Considering 90% of the people on this planet would never have the resources to get fat in the first place...

posted 4 years, 9 months ago
view in context

A funny anecdote:

I was once coming back to the states from Ireland. I was waiting by the baggage claim for my luggage, when I heard a howl right behind me. I turned around and nearly jumped out of my skin. I have a very irrational fear of beagles (though I love dogs in general), and the USDA inspection dog was a beagle! He was howling at the orange I unknowingly had in my backpack. I caused a huge scene, asking the inspector to please get the dog away from me. Eventually she did, and then approached me to take me to the inspection station. I gladly relinquished the orange. :)

posted 5 years ago
view in context

What I want to know is: where do we draw the line for "local"? Is local only what we have within 50 miles? 500 miles?

I live in Central Oregon, and we are not blessed with the Willamette Valley's lengthy growing seasons here. I am acutely aware of every piece of produce I purchase at the store with labels from Chile or Israel, and I would much prefer to buy local. I try to by produce from Oregon and Washington with the intention that it is "local enough". After all, if I were to buy products only from Central Oregon, I'd be eating nothing but beef, corn, and the occasional fruit or vegetable. I do grow what I can in my own garden, but the growing season is brief and harsh here.

So how can those of us who live in harsh environments still support local agriculture?

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context