High anxiety
Whenever I'm working on a cover story for the paper, I get overwhelmed by anxiety. It's not rational; after all these years writing for the paper (I started in 1998), you'd think I'd know that I can, in fact, get the piece done. But every time I think, "I can't do it. I won't be able to do it." Disaster looms.
Last night, happily ensconced in my hotel room, and wearing my mom's old cotton nightgown that I only wear when I'm alone because it's so unflattering (but so comfy!), I tried to relax by watching Animal Planet and reading dumb magazines. It was no use. I had only written 390 words, and today is my big day of reporting. I had a full-fledged panic attack—the kind where you feel like you're going to die before it's over. I took extra Ativan—no more Medication Debate Shuffle for me—and did breathing exercises to get through the worst of it.
Now I'm getting ready to leave to interview a bunch of people during a hectic day, hopping in and out of crowded cars. How will I be able to write notes? How will I endure the pressure of being "on" all day? It's really nerve-wracking. I know most of my fellow reporters don't experience this kind of anxiety- and depression-fueled dread before an assignment. Lucky them.
But I'm guessing the people I'll meet will be nice and funny. They're all super into Jayne Mansfield. That's, uh, quirky, to say the least. Quirky people understand each other. I hope.
Comments
Er, for what it's worth, I still get nervous before, during or after any story that's longer or more important than my regular column, and if it gets a Page 1 mention, I'm so tense all day that I won't even open the paper to that page, lest I see the mistake I'm always sure will face me there (but hardly ever does).
I tell myself it makes me a more careful reporter. (Because that sounds so much better than any of the other possibilities.) But I do know that the more I push myself to do the stuff that makes me nervous, the better things seem to go, and the more I learn.
Writing for a living's a scarier thing than most of us are willing to acknowledge. We just want to get it done, and we want to get it done right.
Posted by: E | April 19, 2006 08:07 PM
I wasn't really sure where to post the following link, but this seemed like a good place.
A few weeks ago, the NY Times published an amazing article in the magazine, which I recommend as a 'must' for your readers:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/02/magazine/02depression.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5088&en=8cf7b919e70e1f04&ex=1301634000&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
The amazing discoveries of these incredibly committed researchers are a long way from becoming a 'standard' treatment, but the insights they have gleaned into depression are extremely valuable for anyone hoping to get a better handle on their situation.
I particularly wanted to highlight the following comment:
"The Prozac revolution showed everyone that tweaking neurochemistry can dampen and sometimes extinguish depression — but only through a generalized approach, hitting the entire brain. ("Carpet-bombing," one neuroscientist calls it.)"
In other words, despite the confidence we place on the professionals and their medications, when it comes to psychoactive agents, treating depression is like using a grenade to kill a mouse. Because of this, side-effects will always be a problem.
Note: the NYT now charges for articles older than a week or two: download it, or it may vanish.
Posted by: BJK | April 21, 2006 04:51 PM