Saturday, July 4, 2009
July 4th
Happy July 4th!!!

To the country and to the six (yes, six) people I know whose birthdays are today and tomorrow, I hope you all enjoy the foll-dee-rol and fireworks in honor of you!! I hope the country and you have very happy birthdays!!!!!!

If any rare reader would like something fun — and relevant — to do, go here and see how much you know about the states of the union. Myself, I'll listen to Kate Smith sing at least once today and will eat something red (strawberries), something white (cheese or cream) and something blue (is there anything besides blueberries?), if not necessarily together.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 12:21 PM
Real world physics - or, will a hole shrink?
While making jewelry yesterday, my mentor-teacher posed a question. We were going to work with precious metal clay (which is an amazing medium, by the way). We were discussing creating a piece with a cut-out area for a gemstone. We know that pmc shrinks about 8-10% when it's fired so we were trying to figure out what size to make the hole. The question was: would the hole become larger or smaller when the piece was fired? We realized there might be variations influenced by depth / density of the piece but the basic principle of whether the hole would increase or shrink made us curious since we hoped to draft a useful template.

We anticipated two possiblities: (1) the hole would become larger as the solid areas around the hole shrank, or (2) the hole would shrink along with the whole piece. We've made many pmc toggle clasps and pendants where one side has space for a bar and all is well even after firing so we realized we'd never paid specific attention to whatever changes happened to the holes. As it happened, she had a small piece on hand with a hole cut out of the middle, so we traced the outside and inside edges and fired it. Our results — well, what do you think?? — Spoiler alert! — do not read the next paragraph until you want to know the answer.

The result of our small experiment was, first, as expected in that the whole piece did shrink about 9 or 10%. But the hole, what about the hole? Well, it turned out to shrink almost not at all, just barely perceptibly, not even the width of a .05mm pencil line. Perhaps the surface tension around the space, which I expected to be pulled at and therefore enlarged by the surrounding material as it heated and shrank, is trumped by the surface tension on the entire unit, to the effect that the space in fact resists the shrinkage. Anyway, we were fascinated, pleased and educated by our experiment and I promised I would write about it here. Now you know, too.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 12:17 PM
Sun!
At last it's a beautiful day in the northeast. Sunny, warm but not too hot, breezy. Enjoy!!!

Labels:

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 8:13 AM
Thursday, July 2, 2009
News of the week (not quite in review)
I LOVE CNN's weekly news quiz. Take this week's here.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 5:45 PM
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
More?!
It seems that Karl Malden and Mollie Sugden have both died. I feel bad for their families in their losses, although I hope they know how much they both enriched many people's lives. The last few days have been a sadly low point in the removal from among us of people with enormous charm and imagination.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 6:58 PM
Bing
Have you tried Bing, Microsoft's new search tool? Its purportedly superior accuracy and usefulness remain to be seen but I like it at first glance and use. Other considerations aside, its daily photos are lovely, complete with descriptions (little button on the lower right) and factoids (hover over different parts of the photos) and the ability to look back at previous days' pictures (arrows on lower right). I'm not sure what's technologically or substantively different from Google or other search engines, or at least the differences are not immediately apparent, but it's a nice new toy on the shelf.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 2 comment(s) | posted at 8:47 AM
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Twitting
I must admit that I quite like Twitter. It's used by some in perhaps silly ways and the occasional spam is annoying but easy to stop. I was sure it would be foolish and trivial - after all, how could anything useful or interesting be said in 140 characters? And yet, how much I like it.

It's quite like passing-by conversations, similar to something I also like where I work - passing many people during the day and exchanging observations and thoughts with them. I'd have thought it would be small talk but it's just quick, not necessarily small. That's the thing that's such a pleasant surprise in person at work and at Twitter. The world and one's awareness are both expanded a bit. And I'm not naïve and yes I know people can masquerade as people they're not and if a dog can type he could impersonate anyone but some voices ring true and there's a certain amount of trust required and you have to choose carefully but you have to do that in real life too. At work it's a function of where one works and who else works there, meaning someone else did the selection for you to some extent and at Twitter it's a question of who one's followers/ees are.

NTL, I think it's cool to become aware of things I might not otherwise know about and to get observations I might not have made on my own and to learn details about subjects I might not have got to on my own or at least not at that moment.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 4 comment(s) | posted at 1:25 PM
Way too many
Too many people who have made the world an interesting and exciting place to live have died recently. Now I hear that Gale Storm and Kenny Rankin both are gone. The Gale Storm Show was one of the few shows my parents let me watch (in reruns of course or I'd be even older than my already ridiculously large number of years old). I'm pretty sure that allowance was part of my mother's determination to convince me that the world was a simple and sweet place where women were always pretty and agreeable, and men were always organized and in charge in the best possible way. The fact that her reality and the world's bore little resemblance to her or these shows' unreasonable facsimile thereof was apparently irrelevant. In any case, Gale Storm was wonderful in her show and, more to my own point, in several noir movies as well. As for Kenny Rankin, he was extremely popular with people who liked his style and he was always upbeat and wildly enthusiastic. His styles ranged from Dylan to Reddy which made him accessible although difficult to categorize.

It's been a sad week for us all. We'd be wise to keep well in mind how quickly we and those we love, as well as those we merely like and even those we don't like all that much, depart this mortal coil.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 9:26 AM
Monday, June 29, 2009
Misc
Haven't blogged in a few weeks due to confluence of work and other activities and sloth.  Okay, maybe not sloth.  Maybe just diminished energy after doing other things.  Anyway, apologies and (I hope) I'm back.

Labels:

Permalink | 2 comment(s) | posted at 9:07 AM
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Hmm...
David Letterman really should get his writers to put their and his verbal acuity and skills to funnier and ultimately more effective use. Bad taste and meanness are such a witless and lazy recourse. When one is ten and on the playground, it's mean but it's part of a social learning process to throw zingers out and laugh in that conspiratorial way at "them." But somewhere around fifteen or twenty or forty or fifty (how old is Letterman now?), most of us realize that nasty flippancies aren't all that funny and might backfire, particularly if, for example, you didn't marry your son's wife until your child was nearly six, stones and glass houses being what they are.

And this isn't about politics, by the way. I completely realize that the Palins are lightning rods and draw ridicule to themselves like flypaper draws flies. All the more reason that it isn't necessary to be tasteless and mean. For one thing it rallies their defenders. For another it overlooks so many others who are worthy of wry remarks. Besides, if Letterman had said anything even remotely like the A-Rod or Spitzer "jokes" about Dick Cheney's daughter or Amy Carter or Chelsea Clinton, for example, not to mention about Sotomayor or Hillary, it would be crystal clear how dreadful the taste and how just plain rude it was. Plus, Dave's trying to slink out of responsibility for the bad taste just added to the stupidity of it all. There's plenty to lambaste Palin (and Letterman) about without dragging either of their young children into it.

Obama's presidency seems to have restored a level of decorum to the public discourse. It would be beyond unfortunate if lazy so-called comedy writers dragged us down again.

Labels: , , ,

Permalink | 3 comment(s) | posted at 9:13 AM
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Easy Savers my eye
So there I was, casually checking on my checking account (heh), just to make sure everything was okay. I (foolishly) barely glanced at the numbers because nothing looked awry. Somehow a hold charge for 14.95, posted today to something called "Easy Saver" caught my eye and since I knew I hadn't bought anything at all today, I frowned. Then I opened another I.E. window and typed "Easy Saver" in the URL bar and found a slightly dizzying array of complaints and diatribes (here and here being just some examples).

It turns out that Easy Saver is a company that offers discounts on some dining, shopping and credit card services. I had never replied to any email from them nor consciously signed up for any service of theirs since I wouldn't be interested.

Pro-Flowers is a flower delivery service like FTD, if a little snazzier, and I have ordered flowers from Pro-Flowers many times - their arrangements are wonderful and what is delivered is often even lovelier than it seems onscreen.

Apparently Easy Saver is associated with Pro-Flowers. If you even *look* at the Easy Saver offer when you are checking out, apparently you more or less are (however inadvertently) signing up for their services.

Thanks to the Internet complaints, I did what you must do if you get snagged by this scheme: call 800-355-1837 (Easy Saver's). They must have had to do this over and over and over and over who knows how many times because all the nice woman did was ask my name and zip code before she confirmed my email address (scary to hear someone tell you your own address and phone number) and promise/agree to credit my account for the six months (yikes!) they'd charged me for so far. Scary. And remiss of me that I hadn't noticed the charge before but better late than never, right?!

Note to self: call or write Pro-flowers.com and complain about their highly questionable association with a company that is disingenuous at best, deliberately deceptive and a thief at worst. Since nearly five hundred people posted online that they were caught in this, heaven knows how many people it really has been. Does Pro-Flowers understand about ill-gotten gains, I wonder?

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 9:20 AM
Monday, June 8, 2009
Well said
French existential absurdist tragi-comedy rocks!!

In accurate fairness, the actual statement was, "I want to thank Manhattan theatre audiences for proving that French existential absurdist tragi-comedy rocks." It was Geoffrey Rush's brilliant remark upon winning a Tony Award last night for Best Actor in the play Exit the King. Who'd have thought Eugene Ionesco would appeal to large enough audiences that it would win a Tony. Rush is listed as one of the two translators so perhaps that explains his, shall we say, way with words. And he is an amazing actor. And Ionesco is wonderful (The Bald Soprano and Rhinoceros were almost required reading to those on a binge of exciting theatre). So congratulations to him on both the Tony and the witticism.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 9:03 AM
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Procrastinating
This is a somewhat personal post but I had an epiphany that amused me and might even help other procrastinators so it seems worth posting even if it's a bit more revelatory than I like to be out here on the big wide open exposed Internet.

To begin with, let me say that I often am in quandaries when making decisions. Which dress to wear? Which side to part my hair? Which shoes? Which toy to buy for one of T3CCITW? Which way to word that sentence? Which plant to buy? Which plant to place right there - one may look better than the other, grow higher, not grow higher, prefer sun, prefer shade, propagate a lot, a little....? Which phrase will be more apt and convey what I mean better? Which outfit is more appropriate? Which makes me look less ugly? Well, you see how this goes. (No psychoanalysis, please!)

Now to the present moment. Two or three weeks ago, the nice man who mows my lawn (and cleans my gutters, saint that he is) had dug up and turned over the soil in three places so I could plant flowers for the summer. I'd been feeling guilty that I hadn't put anything in - not because I didn't want to but it had rained a lot, been hot a lot and, well, which plants did I want to put in that would look great, last well, grow well, etc. (see above paragraph)). And then this morning he came to finish some mowing. I felt really bad that he'd think I wasn't appreciative or something so I ran to the store to buy flats of flowers and get back before he was done. I made quick and authoritative decisions, bought many nice things and came home to place and plant them without any trouble.

While driving home, sweaty from the rush of running out and running around the garden center picking things, I began to ask myself why I hadn't just done all this last weekend. I was mulling it over when, bingo!, I had a realization. By waiting to do what needed to be done until the last minute, I had avoided agonizing and second, third even tenth and twentieth guessing myself (yes, I do that if I have time). Instead, I did it quickly and made choices and everything is fine. Perhaps even better, actually, since editorializing doesn't always result in better choices.

This all sounds so logical and obvious of course and I have no idea why I didn't think of it before. There's so much wisdom in what one sees after a realization, isn't there?

So now let's see whether anything changes. . . .

Labels:

Permalink | 4 comment(s) | posted at 11:26 AM
Saturday, June 6, 2009
D-Day
It's been sixty-five years since the extraordinary events of June 6, 1944 and many are honoring and celebrating that day. The pictures are so simple and so plain and so moving. The world leaders are dignified and calm, and moving. It is good to see and think and remember a moment when, as Obama quoted Lyndon Johnson as pointing out, a moment when history and circumstance converge to require something of us and we rise to meet it.

(By the way, kudos to C-Span and Fox for broadcasting the entire commemoration with no interruptions. CNN covered it but cut away for commercials the couple of times I checked. The major networks didn't cover it at all. Sad for them, good for C-Span and Fox - and us.)

It surprises me how emotionally powerful it is to see men receive the French Légion d'honneur and realize that they were there, really there, and have lived sixty-five years longer making them all over eighty. One of them is even wearing his uniform from then! And silly as it sounds to say this, they don't look any different from other people, you know?

Why isn't there a Russian head of state there? They were one of the Allies - or didn't they participate?
What are all the medals on Prince Charles's chest - did he fight in combat??
I didn't realize that Bob Dole had been part of the Normandy invasion. (Bad me.)

The slow rendition of taps was amazing. The speeches were wonderful. The fly-over was an extraordinarily moving moment. When that fourth plane pulled away, it was almost heart-breaking.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 10:03 AM
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
L.C.
Lovely paean to Leonard Cohen after attending his recent Boston concert (lucky, lucky woman).

Labels: ,

Permalink | 1 comment(s) | posted at 2:16 PM
Book blogs
From Normblog to an article in the American Historical Association's newsmagazine to three terrific book(ish) blogs:
- Writers Read which doesn't post anywhere near often enough for how absorbing it is
- RConversation which is Rebecca MacKinnon's "ongoing conversation" with the internet
- Papercuts which is a relaxed and interesting blog about books, pure and simple
Actually, the AHA article mentions far more but these are the ones I want to recommend.

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 9:11 AM
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
5-second movie reviews
Cool new Facebook page (are they're called pages?): 5-Second Movie Reviews. Fun to read and quick opinions / reviews of movies and tv shows by someone who sees lots of both. The latest review is another rave for Up which may have received the most wildly enthusiastic reviews of any movie I've known about.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 11:50 PM
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Great movies
One of my all-time favorite movies is on TCM tonight: The Winslow Boy. Written by Terrence Rattigan, it stars Robert Donat as the defense attorney, at his articulate handsome bemused and intense best. The always wonderful Cedric Hardwicke (after whom I named a small stuffed whale when I was a girl, for a reason I no longer recall) and the huskiest-voiced-wide-eyed-woman-in-movies Margaret Leighton are the boy's parents. It's thoroughly engrossing, attractive and engaging to watch, and it poses compelling questions which are interesting to ponder and fun to discuss.

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 2 comment(s) | posted at 1:30 PM
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Question
What is a British network thinking, signing octomom to a contract for a reality show? (Details here.) They say it's a really just a quasi-reality show because filming won't be non-stop; is that better? And anyway, who knew there was a distinction to be had between "quasi" and "real" reality shows? And mostly: why give her even a tiny bit of attention?

It can't be much longer until a man and a lion are put into an arena and told to fight to the death, on live television. (Everything old is new again, eh what?)

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 12:21 PM
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Prince Harry
No idea why he's doing this nor why he's doing it now, but Prince Harry is in New York City where he paid a visit to Ground Zero (the World Trade Center) and laid a wreath. The piece on the visit in the Daily Mail has more pictures and is just as quietly pleasant about the whole excursion as anyone else's so here is that link. Given his monied and privileged upbringing coupled with the shocking and sudden death of his mother and all the celebrinonsense surrounding her and his father and his stepmother, it's impressive that he comports himself like a guy with his heart in the right place and a fair amount of respect for people.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 1 comment(s) | posted at 11:40 PM
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Crossword puzzles
I love doing the New York Times crossword puzzles and have done since I was in high school, having had the virus enthusiasm passed on to me by mother who did them every day as regularly and necessarily as getting dressed. It's always annoyed one of my siblings that she and I did and enjoyed the Times puzzles while he not only did not particularly enjoy them but also could not do them after Tuesday - patently smarter though he is than we (which I say somewhat, although only somewhat, in jest). My father preferred the (clearly inferior) puzzles in the Daily News and the New York Post - though patently smarter, too, than my mother and me. (Please note that I sincerely hope any rare readers recognize sarcasm and flippancy here, and do not take anything I have said as offensive.)

Of late, my excitement and enthusiasm has increased many times - a hundred fold, Jane A. might say - because two compatriots and I have found each other. They enjoy the puzzles at least as much as I do and do them as furiously and thoroughly. It's so much fun to complete each puzzle and then compare times and specific reactions to words and themes with each other. I haven't enjoyed doing the puzzles this much in years. And, not surprisingly, we share lots of other enthusiasms, too, so our conversations range all over the place and are great fun.

Also, from them I learned about a daily NYT puzzle blog, Rex Parker Does the NYT Crossword Puzzle. This is such an amazing go-to site in that Rex is apparently unable not to finish every single puzzle and then write wittily about it, disrespectful-though-adoring fan that he is. And yesterday I met one of the proprietors of Ryan and Brian Do Crosswords, another fun puzzle site and a terrific resource that's a lot of fun. Both blogs have all manner of great links to other puzzle sites, too. What a wondrous world....

Labels: , , ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 5:51 PM
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Ethical conflict?
There was an article in yesterday's NY Times about Greta Van Susteren and Sarah Palin and their husbands. Its point is that the two families have had personal and business interactions while Van Susteren was reporting on the Palins. It poses the question as to whether, when news reporters and news subjects become entwined, in whatever way(s), there may be a huge, dangerous and ominous cavern that sucks down reliable and objective news reporting.

It does seem self-evident that objective reporting is impossible when investigator and investigatee are friends or associates. Of course, 24-hours-around-the-clock coverage demands constant verbiage, which doesn't help.

My personal favorite is Alan Greenspan and his wife (i.e., the woman with whom he presumably shares a bed as well as breakfast and dinner and all manner of casual conversation and intimacy). Andrea Mitchell, premiere NBC news reporter, was his close friend and then his wife for years, all the while he held the country's chief financial post. She wrote hundreds of pieces on politics and the economy and one wonders how any of them could possibly have been neutral or objective. Even more, one wonders why it was never a cause for alarm and the subject of loudly-voiced concerns.

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 9:06 AM
Monday, May 25, 2009
More Jane
Watched "The Jane Austen Book Club" since I was in an Austen frame of mind. It's an odd little story and I'm not sure it doesn't strain one's credibility a bit too much but it's kind of charming. It brings an Austen-esque touch to the lives of six people who decide to discuss and (re)read one Austen book each month for six months. It's interesting to see and hear their interpretations of the various characters. Furthermore, it's an astonishing 198 years since the first book was printed and it's almost impossible to believe that the books are so much a part of our social fabric. the plot twists and tie-ups are a bit too tidy but they are faithful to Austen and they're done without too much melodrama.

It's a nice touch to have the characters develop as the characters in the books. To some extent this works because the film is fairly well written. To another it works because the actors are all terrific. The coup de grace is that each actor had to read entirely whichever book his/her character was leading in each month's meeting of the club. Given the literary plot this definittely gave substance to the layers.

The Northanger Abbey play scene is priceless, I have to say, and the subtle references are nice. As in "Clueless," there are verbal and physical references that will become apparent upon subsequent viewings, I feel sure. If I have a discernible quibble, it's mostly that it didn't seem substantial enough. I don't know if the fault likes it too many television actors whose gravitas is thin or if the writing simply lacked depth. It's pleasant and has some pleasant turns but it never quite picks up enough steam for my taste.

Among the main actors, Emily Blunt the most interesting to watch. At the beginning, she is so uptight your eyes hurt. I'm not entirely sure how she shows the transition so effectively. She reminds me of Amanda Root's transformation in my favorite film version of "Persuasion" when she morphs from plain to lovely without a film cut and without any change other than the light in her eyes. Some actresses have remarkable abilities.

Madeleine Peyroux sings "Getting some fun out of life" over the credits at the end of the movie and is a dead ringer for Billie Holliday though a lot less loopy. I can't wait to hear more.

Labels: , , ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 4:58 PM
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Two eras, same foolishness
In the last week I've seen two movies whose message about equality between men and women is astonishing the same even though their stories are nearly seventy years apart. It's pretty depressing, actually.

The earlier, released in 1931 and starring Norma Shearer and Robert Montgomery is "Strangers May Kiss" (the title meaning something to the effect that it's all right for men to behave badly - kiss, drink, carouse, keep wives in the dark - but that women may not). Shearer plays Lisbeth, as snappy and independently modern as any women in current films. She believes marriage is outmoded, something women strive for only to be disappointed as their husbands wander or leave and she vows she will not get caught up in such dishonest nonsense. She has two men in her life: Steve (Montgomery), a charming, frivolous, rich playboy who is mad about her and continually asks her to marry him; and Alan (Neil Hamilton), a handsome world-traveling reporter who thrills and woos her while sharing her disdain for marriage and passion for freedom. Smitten with Alan, Lisbeth spends several weeks in Mexico with Alan (and we all know what that means) but when he's called to an assignment, although he declares his undying love for her, he reveals that he is married, albeit unhappily (surprise). She banishes him because of her principles and her unwillingness to throw herself at a married man, then spends three years cavorting around Europe and living wildly (and we are meant to know what that means, too). Eventually, of course, both men re-appear, both wanting to marry her (Alan has divorced his wife) but when Alan learns of her wild behavior he drops her faster than a hot potato, as if a red "A" were emblazoned on her head, his own adultery evidently being beside the point. Steve, ever noble and good (a/k/a not the one any self-respecting heroine could choose) wants to marry her simply because he loves her. In fact, when she explains that Alan has refused to marry her because of her dissolute behavior, Steve even says something to the effect of "why is it all right for us to behave like that if it's not all right for you?" Indeed.

The other film is "Lost in Austen" which stars Jemima Rooper and Eliot Cowan, two comely Brits, and a bevy of familiar faces. It's the story of a 21st century Londoner who enjoys reading "Pride and Prejudice" more than living her own life, partly informed by the luscious Colin Firth (Darcy) and Jennifer Ehle (Elizabeth) version. Elizabeth Bennett slips through a bathroom wall into a modern apartment (okay, there's an element of science fiction but it's just a tiny one, more a suspension of disbelief) and convinces Amanda Price (Jemima Rooper) to switch with her. Amanda goes back through the wall and joins the Bennett household at the beginning of the familiar story. (As an aside, Hugh Bonneville is terrific as Mr. Bennett, perhaps the best characterization in the film, close to Lindsay Duncan's Lady Catherine and in great contrast to Alex Kingston' excessively shrill Mrs. Bennett. The most amusing change/twist is handsome Mr. Wickham turning out to have been completely misrepresented by Jane Austen.) Anyway, this 2008 film has it that Elizabeth becomes captivated by the modern world and Amanda by the 19th century or, more accurately, by Darcy, who in turn falls head over heels for Amanda . . . until he learns that she has had an active social life (we know what that means) at which point he abandons her for Bingley's twirpy sister.

Both films work things out in the end, of course, because happy endings trump social conventions in most romantic films. And it's almost the same message in both films - Shearer convinces Hamilton that she has never stopped loving him and that her "misbehavior" was only a way of surviving without him and that she will never stray again (no such promise from him, needless to say). Amanada convinces Darcy that she has thought and dreamed only of him and wanted only him even when she was with other men - and if he fails to realize that she read about him at 12 and therefore it was truly him she dreamt of, well, so be it.

But I find it astonishing that there is still such a powerful assumption that it's all right to disapprove when women are wild but perfectly reasonable for men. It's sad that dismay makes sense in a 2008 movie when a woman has led an active social life - that she is still seen as ruined and untouchable in some way although a man can have spent as much familiar time with many women. How can there have been so little change from 1811 to 1931 to 2008? Since movies vividly show the social mores of a time, I look forward to movies (soon, I hope) showing we have stopped labeling and judging men and women differently or even at all.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 4 comment(s) | posted at 11:18 PM
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
A.I.2009 finale
If Dial Idol is right - and it has been correct this season every time I've checked - the voting difference between Kris Allen and Adam Lambert was 61.14 for Allen and 60.04 for Lambert. On the other hand, Idol Blog's 6000+ voters have it 51% for Lambert and 49% for Allen. The logical conclusion is that it's really really really really really close.

Which means that - as they will do anyway - the producers have the ultimate vote. As anyone who's watched the show for very long knows, it all depends on who they think will be the more reliable money-winner. I suppose Carrie Underwood is the ideal, if record sales and revenue are the measure, but whether that means calm and pleasant Allen or wild and pleasant Lambert, who knows. The producers seemed to annoint Lambert early and thoroughly, leading me to think they want to edge up their image, in which case it will be Lambert. But I may be wrong.

For a different take on the match-up, read Stephen Holden's article in the NYT this week. His points seem utterly ridiculous to me because, for one thing, they smack of academic English classes penchant for finding wildly symbolic meanings where none really exist. And they also reek of judgmentalism and assumed homophoia as well as disdain. I truly think we're all way beyond caring about a singer's sexual preference, for heaven's sake, don't you? And might not someone dislike someone's singing simply because they don't like it, not because they're homophobic and dislike eyeliner on men? And might not someone dislike someone's singing simply because they don't like it, not because they dislike whatever they think young white guys from Arkansas are like? Holden's piece is a nasty piece of journalism run wildly amok and deliberately and bogusly (is that a word?) stirring up controversy where none exists.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 3 comment(s) | posted at 4:19 PM
Monday, May 18, 2009
Lew Ayres
I Tivo'd a bunch of Dr. Kildare movies recently, the ones with Lew Ayres and Lionel Barrymore as the young idealistic Kildare and his grumpy brilliant advisor Gillespie. Both men are intelligent and instinctively wise diagnosticians who steer themselves with a stern moral compass, motivated by decency and compassion. They make an almost perfect two sides of a proverbial coin, visually and textually, one smooth and gentle, the other gruff and sarcastic. And they're both quintessential type-A workaholics who live in the hospital because going back and forth to other residences would waste so much time.

The Kildare films hold up surprisingly well to our oh-so-sophisticated modern standards, needing only a dash of suspended disbelief for outdated morals and social expectations. The language is not at all archaic although some of the stock characters are different than current ones. But when Gillespie burst out with a short speech about knowing a time will come when health care will be as basic to people's rights as are food and shelter (sound familiar?!), I realized they are mainly dated by literal timing, not by sensitivities.

Kildare's parents are fonts of extraordinarily modern wisdom. They are also gracious and far less concerned about their son's prestige and financial success than that he determine and do the right thing. Their advice generally is that he rely on his inner instincts because he will know what the right thing is to do.

I especially enjoy his mother's self-assurance and her cheerfully-given advice to her son. She always knows what's going on with him and always has something forthright to say to him. When he is smitten by a young and adorable Lana Turner - a bad-girl-with-heart-of-gold love interest before the Larraine Day character took front and center in Kildare' heart for the duration of the series - his unusual mother advises him to plunge in and marry her right away because "if it isn't going to work then you find out quickly and haven't wasted much time but if it is going to work then you have that much more time together." How about that?

Ayres' eyes always twinkled and he often seemed faintly bemused. He easily and comfortably inhabited every character he played and seemed totally involved with the people and circumstances around him, as did Lionel Barrymore. Both Barrymore and he were such good actors that it was hard to realize at times that they weren't actually the people we see on film. And Ayres is awfully nice from an eye candy point of view, to boot, and so at ease with himself.

My mother introduced me to Ayres' Dr. Kildare when I was young and impressionable. We would swoon together as he smiled and cajoled his way through things. As a result, in some ways it is he I check gorgeous and sexy against. Could be worse frames of reference, right?

The Dr. Kildare series began in 1938 and continued for about five years and ten films. In addition to them, Ayres made over 150 films including All Quiet on the Western Front which won the 1930 Best Oscar, Donovan's Brain which is one of my favorite campy fun scifis, Johnny Belinda which won the 1948 Golden Globe best film and co-starred Jane Wyman who won the Best Actress Oscar and Holiday which is one of my favorite of the risqué and wild late-thirties films as Ayres plays Kate Hepburn's ne'er-do-well brother and Gary Grant's ultimate benefactor to Hepburn's Philadelphia-Story-esque lead.

In Johnny Belinda, by the way, Aryes was nominated as Best Actor (losing to Lawrence Olivier for Hamlet - the same year that Barbara Bel Geddes lost Best Supporting Actress to Claire Trevor for Key Largo, which is another subject for another day). Hollywood lore has it that Wyman fell madly in love with Ayres during the filming of Johnny Belinda and left her husband (some fellow named Ronald Reagan) to be with Ayres, but they never married.

Ayres appeared and starred in films and television during the fifties and sixties and a bit in the seventies but never earned the fame and adulation one would think he deserved - although he does have two stars on the Walk of Fame. He was a matinee idol who was determined to do some good. He refused to fight in WWII and eventually garnering conscientious objector status and performed medical relief work. Today he wouldn't be at particularly unusual to combine good looks with fame with social action, but fifty-plus years ago his concerns and his determination to do something about them were ridiculed and hurt his career.

I've often heard/read that he was invited to play Dr. Kildare on television, not surprisingly, but he said he wouldn't do it unless there was no cigarette sponsorship and the network refused, so he declined to play the good doctor (lucky for Richard Chamberlain). He was an active follower of Eastern spirituality and wrote, directed and produced Altars of the World in the late seventies; it won several awards including a Golden Globe but got little viewership because distributors thought it was too odd for a movie star to proselytize spirituality. Considering Tim Robbins, Sean Penn, Vanessa Redgrave, Gwyneth Paltrow, etc., as well as the ban on cigarette advertising on tv, it's safe to say that individuality, social awareness and tolerance have improved a lot in the last half-century.

Anyway, this is my tribute. Brought on by, and thanks to, Tivo and memory. I hope at least one person who never saw any of his films will now watch and enjoy.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 6 comment(s) | posted at 1:54 AM
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Coffee + talking
Not surprising that Starbucks has an interactive site, I suppose, but it is more interesting and fun that I expected. Here.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 11:22 PM
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Twitter magnet poetry
One of my favorite possessions at home is my magnet poetry. I don't use it all that often but random word juxtapositions are almost always surprisingly interesting.

So it turns out there's a Twitter version of magnet poetry called twitter magnets and it's a lot of fun. You get the requisite 140 characters to play with - move around, change, reassemble, etc. - and you can post the result to their twitter page anonymously or with your i.d. I'm afraid it's more addictive than using the physical magnets (sorry, fridge) perhaps because of the keyboard immediacy, and the results are a blast.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 9:24 AM
Twittering
I've been checking out Twitter the last couple of days and I have to say that I like it. I don't know why exactly and I'm not sure what it's really all about but I like it. Regular websites seem a bit stodgy and sluggish now. Must partly be the immediacy and quickness, precisely what I thought would put me off. It functions well though there are some glitches, like you don't see all the icons of the people/things you're following if you log in one way whereas you do see them all if you log in differently, and while search works efficiently it's dependent on using search words that are in the tweets you want to find (like all searches). With a mere 140 characters available, it's easier to see whether you want to read something or not, of course. And there's a certain level of you're on your own. And there's lots of garbage and silliness. But it's pretty useful and cool, at least at first glances.

Labels:

Permalink | 1 comment(s) | posted at 9:17 AM
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Anniversary of impassioned people
Billy Joel, John Ashcroft and Dante . . . all celebrating birthdays today. I suppose we don't know if they celebrate such pedestrian things as birthdays where Dante is, but I kind of hope they do since he's 744-years-old. He and John Brown could toast each other and their intense passion for convincing others of things. John's a baby, though, only barely 200 years old (209 to be exact). And they could invite James Barrie, creator of Nana and Captain Hook and all the little Darlings, to join them even though he's a mere 160 today. I rather like it that Barbara Wodehouse who conveyed her passions about good dogs shares the day with them all. And the passionate Daniel Berrigan who maybe was not as charming as the others but surely believed as wholeheartedly and with all the force of his convictions (no pun intended, well maybe it was). And the wonderful British actors Joan Sims and Albert Finney both of whom convey passion magnificently. Oh, and Ralph Boston who won a bazillion Olympic medals in the long jump; watching him jump kind of ruined it for me for anyone else because of his unique combination of grace and intensity thus embodying the hallmark of today's birthday people. Quite a day.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 1 comment(s) | posted at 3:44 AM
Friday, May 8, 2009
Speaking without saying
Love this from Will Durant: To say nothing, especially when speaking, is half the art of diplomacy. I will admit that I loathe it when people say nothing when they're talking to me, but I like the concept at least if it's used judiciously.

Labels:

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 8:17 AM
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Bailout, more
If a plan has been agreed upon, why is there no news on it? With several million people's pocketbooks in serious jeopardy, why aren't print and visual media demanding a fix? There have been no editorials, no diatribes, nothing. Or do the media people know it's all being plotted behind closed doors and we shouldn't fret, just wait it out? It's hard not to feel this is all highly scripted for showing off the muscles of the MTA, first, and the legislature, second. I'm not sure whose reputation it helps because no one is coming off very well....

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 5:44 PM
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Bailout?
The NYS legislature supposedly has worked out a plan to keep commuter fare increases to a dull roar this year, namely 10% as opposed to the insane and usurious 28% they were proposing. At the rental rates we pay in mid-state, that means paying $404 a month (not $471) and I should be relieved. But paying four hundred dollars just to get my feet from home to work still seems appalling. Something is wrong. It's not any news that income and expenses are wildly disparate, but I wish there was a recourse. Other than finding a rich husband or robbing a bank or engaging in the oldest profession (which wouldn't get me much considering my age and looks or lack thereof) or selling all my earthly possessions (which wouldn't net all that much, come to think of it). If anyone has a brilliant or even just a practical suggestion for how to increase income by, say, 15-20 percent, please pass it on.

Labels:

Permalink | 2 comment(s) | posted at 11:57 PM
Sunday, May 3, 2009
The Unit
Realizing as I do that I watch an inordinate amount of television, way too much by the measure that my emotional responses sometimes blur the line between life and tales, nevertheless I found myself distressed when Molly was snatched by that revolting Sam guy on The Unit. He is really perfect casting insofar as he looks like a scary and loose canon of whom one should be exceedingly wary. But he is actually too creepy. Makes me want to change channels except that I am too interested in everyone else.

But then, her dreadful ordeal only moments behind her, Molly decides she's had enough. Now she's had enough?! Wait a minute! Wasn't it she herself who deliberately flouted what everyone told her not to do? Didn't she consciously and deliberately continue hobnobbing with Mrs. Drake on the presumed theory that she knew best? How is it fair for her to cause all that trouble and then, in effect, blame the unit and Jonas?

Unless, of course, it's all parallax.... (see my movie post tomorrow).

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 11:28 PM
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Tales my mother told me
One of my mother's favorite phrases was "God writes straight with crooked lines." Keeping in mind that I'm not religious - primarily because, if there were a God, does he/she decide to side with one opposing interest one day and another the next? after all, enemies often each claim utter devotion to him/her and it seems unlikely that he/she would choose sides and many enemies do fight in his/her name, at least so they say; please don't yell at me, this is just an opinion - nevertheless I have always been inordinately fond of this thought for it seeing good. Optimism is something I do wholeheartedly believe in and strive toward, even if I cannot always achieve it. In fact it's clear that crooked (i.e., unpleasant or difficult) situations often emerge into superb unexpected outcomes. The most recent and pleasing (to me) was a difficult situation at work which resulted in both renewed and new associations and friendships, partly revolving around passion for the New York Times crossword puzzle which was another passion of my mother's, come to think of it. Ciao, mamma!

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 9:11 AM
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Japanese restaurant
I gave in at last and went to the restaurant voted best Japanese restaurant in the area for the last several years. (My instinct is still influenced by my father's unfortunate aversion to popular things but I overcame . . . and what a good thing I did.) It's no big secret that my geographical region is the so-called Mid-Hudson Valley north of New York City, so it's not revealing much to identify the restaurant. It's called Neko and has two branches, one in New Paltz and one in Wappingers Falls. The atmosphere is very pleasant. Not rushed, not hoity-toity (which some Japanese restaurants are), not too hot and not too cold. (Goldilocks would be happy, I guess.) The waitresses were friendly and helpful. There was a big party in a back room and despite the occasional startling bursts of flames and outbursts of laughter, it was never difficult to concentrate on my own friends and food. Most important, the food was delicious. I find miso soup and salad always scrumptious but they were particularly light and flavorful. I finished with ginger ice cream instead of more sushi (which is really what I wanted!) because I was trying to test the whole spectrum, and the ice cream was perfect. I highly recommend Neko and can't wait to return.

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 9:19 AM
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Summer in April
I've heard of Christmas in April as a fundraiser and Christmas in July as a gift-giving treat but this weekend we had summer in April. It was 95 degrees here this afternoon. Now I'm definitely sick of snow but 95 on April 26th does not bode well for July and August. Heaven help those of us who get breathless when the heat and humidity pair up too much. Hey, what is weather if not something to complain about, right?! Anyway, it was gorgeous and the flowering trees are very happy indeed!

Labels:

Permalink | 2 comment(s) | posted at 1:58 AM
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Such chutzpah
My May commuting pass arrived from Metro-North. The envelope included a flyer with all kinds of cheery talk about how to lower the actual cost because the government's stimulus package allows pre-tax withdrawal to be increased by about $75. Of course that's been true for several months - but the important minor detail they omit from their jollity (with apologies for the sarcasm) is that the MTA is hoping/planning to raise fares in June by 33%. That's not a typo. Thirty-three percent. That will bring it to over $500 for people in my area.

Interesting logic. On the one hand: hey, here's some good news - you can withhold more pre-tax to pay your commuting fare. On the other hand: you have to pay more now, in fact twice more than the more you can withhold. This kind of logic puts one in mind of that definition of "chutzpah" as what someone has who kills their parents and then begs mercy from the court because they're an orphan.

The math is interesting, too. Pre-tax put-asides are meant to say that you're saving 1/3 in actual dollars, so an additional $75 is equivalent to around $25. The proposed increase, however, is an additional $100. So the net is $75 dollar more per month, even assuming the pre-tax allowance isn't cut back. So it comes down to an additional $1200+ per year for the fare which is supposedly being offset by pre-tax savings of $300 more. Which is still a net additional cost of $900 at minimum. Nine hundred dollars!! Two years ago our fares were raised 9% and two years before that were raised 7% so in less than five years our fares have doubled.

A $100+ increase - and $500+ per month overall - is exhorbitant and outrageous. And it's not as if raises would match that increase - good raises are in the 5-8% range - but certainly not this year. This year, after all, this year many people are losing their jobs and few are getting raises at all, let alone 30%.

Why haven't State legislators worked this out, as they promised? Shouldn't they be massively encouraging people to take the train - green initiatives and all, if reasonableness fees isn't good sense enough. Couldn't they boldly lower fares so more people would take the train? Do they want people to stop working in New York City and earning good salaries and bringing cash back to mid-state counties? How are Governor Patterson and Mayor Bloomberg allowing this to happen to their constituents?

And what happened to the promised criminal charges a couple of years ago when it turned out the MTA was hiding real account books and had a huge surplus? And what happened to the billions of surplus funds?

It's not as if we get more when they increase the rent, I mean fare. ($500 is what a college friend is paying for rent this coming year, by they way.) Two years after the last hike, we still have unbelievably smelly bathrooms, grimy windows and seats, and are almost always slightly late, among other things. There's even a disclaimer on the tickets about how they don't guaranteed a seat, only that you'll arrive eventually. We also have no choice because buses and cars (i.e., driving into NYC) is prohibitively traffic-jammed, cost-wearing on cars and people, and the complete opposite of good for the environment.

We do get to see the Hudson River every day on my line, and that's wonderful, although no thanks to them, of course. Come to think of it, I wonder when they'll think of charging us a "view fee" since we pass a beautiful river instead of junkyards and manufacturing plants.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 4 comment(s) | posted at 9:25 PM
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Good point
I really like today's quote from C.S. Lewis - We are what we believe we are.
Probably neither a hundred percent true nor one hundred percent possible, but good to aim for on all levels.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 2:09 PM
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Easter Monday update
I already have two of next year's egg surprises! One is a tiny green frog with cute legs and red markings on its face. And another is a small stamp with the first name's initial. Cheers!

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 9:18 AM
Monday, April 13, 2009
Easter
Super egg hunt yesterday! When she arrived, the hunter waited calmly while the adults greeted and chattered. Even though she could see some of the brightly colored ovoids, she just smiled and waited patiently. Once she started, at first she methodically put them, unopened, in her basket. Her plan was to collect them all and then concentrate on opening them, but curiosity got to her after a while and she started opening them as she found them. It was so much fun to see how delighted she was by glittery hair clips and egg-shaped erasers, among other things! One thing I especially like is finding all sorts of little things other than candy - although candy is definitely part of it too, being *the* tradition, after all. Shoe clip-on flowers, a tiny purple bendable magnet-man, a stack-of-crayons, stickers, pipe cleaners. . . . I saw one or two too-perfect-for-Easter things that were irresistible and too big to fit into eggs - the small boxed set of fourteen miniature Peter Rabbit books being a case in point - so this year I added a scavenger-hunt element to a few of the eggs and put written notes with directions about where to look in a few eggs. It was so much fun to watch her read a hand-printed note and then go off to follow the directions. Next year there'll be a one-year-old, too, which will add an interesting twist to the excitement.

I heard about a neat way for when children are older and maybe don't get much of a kick out of magnets and bouncy balls. The Easter Bunny hides five or ten eggs per child and the eggs have candy and/or money in them. The children scurry around to find the eggs and the person who gets the most eggs has the satisfaction of finding the most eggs, and then the money and candy are distributed equally among the kids. Inventive, don't you think.

Happy spring and Easter to all!

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 7 comment(s) | posted at 1:29 PM
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Birthdays
Today is the birthday of Billie Holiday and of William Wordsworth. Two poetic people who had a phenomenal way with words. Despite her and his travails, each made listeners/readers feel optimistic. What is more lovely - except the flowers themselves - than "I wandered lonely as cloud" which ends:
A host, of golden daffodils;
beside the lake, beneath the trees,
fluttering and dancing in the breeze. . . .
And then my heart with pleasure fills,
and dances with the daffodils.
And didn't anything Holiday sang sound wonderful even if the lyrics were poignant? Tell you what: you memorize or recite a Wordsworth poem and I'll hum a Holiday song . . . and/or vice versa. Deal?

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 3 comment(s) | posted at 3:00 PM
Monday, April 6, 2009
Connections . . . and Sushi
My notation on Yours Mine and Ours yesterday was picked up by a movie tagging site that displayed an ad for an upcoming Nora Roberts movie. That wouldn't necessarily have piqued my interest except that it said Tippi Hedren is in it. I've been a fan of hers most of my movie-enjoying life - especially Marnie which is one of my top-5 favorites and the Birds which are both better movies than you realize until you see them ten or fifteen times and come to see and hear tons of visual and spoken details that are just wonderful. Which is how I found Tracy Griffith, Melanie's sister, the first woman graduate of the California Sushi Academy.

Assuming her press shots are accurate (had to say that), Tracy Griffith is a gorgeous redhead with music and acting credits and more to the point a restaurant in Napa called Sushi Outlaw and an intriguing and delicious-looking cookbook called Sushi American Style. Her unique take on sushi is to use otherwise normal ingredients in "creative, delicious combinations" rather than using raw fish. It's her mission to recommend easy-to-find ingredients in unusual combinations and it sounds amazingly good. Vegetable sushi isn't all that extraordinarily any more but goat cheese and pine nuts are as are the Asian, Mexican, barbecue and tons of other suggestions and recipes she includes. There's even a dessert sushi. And I'm intrigued by her suggestion for a make-your-own sushi party for a group gathering. I bet regular food is going to seem awfully pedestrian today. . . .

Labels: ,

Permalink | 2 comment(s) | posted at 8:48 AM
Twinkies
P.S. to my post about sushi that is almost certainly as nutritious as it is delicious (see above), today is the 78th anniversary of the invention (is that the right word?) of Hostess Twinkies. The Wikipedia entry includes the ingredients which are, among others, a heckuva lot of 'ose' things, no surprise there. I was a bit surprised, however, by the idea of banana Twinkies and that they were banana-filled before they were vanilla (or whatever that creme really is) filled. Anyway, it's an amusing juxtaposition to be drooling over Tracy Griffith's sushi and reading about Twinkies all within about two minutes.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 3 comment(s) | posted at 8:47 AM
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Times change
I wonder how much it would cost to buy groceries this week for a family of two adults and eighteen children including teenagers and toddlers.

While hanging shelves today (which is, yes, an underhanded aside by way of noting my afternoon's accomplishment), I had movies on in the background to distract me in case I panicked or hit my thumb or anything.  Over the course of the day, several movies passed through my semi-awareness (perhaps not a fair way to "watch" or assess them but that's just the way it was.
5 Children and It is a bit sticky sweet sometimes and a bit manipulative other times but overall delightful and Eddie Izzard as the sand fairy is wonderful as are the Henson characters.
The TV Set is ghastly - I didn't make it even halfway.
The Good Woman is a bit too "period" but Helen Hunt and Scarlett Johanssen are very good.  The movie is a good reminder that despite the social problems we have these days, nevertheless we have succeeded in moving beyond the ridiculous moralizing of previous eras.  The dresses are great, too!
Yours Mine and Ours, which stars Henry Fonda and Lucille Ball with an enormous blended family including Tim Matheson as a snide teenager, is fun to watch because both Fonda and Ball are so relaxed - they almost stroll through it - and because it's another chance to be glad we're now and not then (children weren't allowed in the hospital for their mother's birth, of course).  The final kicker was when they went to the grocery store and supposedly bought out the place.  Everyone went nuts as the tally kept growing.  I was curious to see what huge number would appear.  I kept reminding myself that it was taking place in 1968, a mere forty years ago.  But imagine my astonishment when the bill came to . . . the whopping, amazing, huge amount of . . . are you ready? . . .  $126. 

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 7:49 PM
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Attitudes
Despite their support of him, evidently the press can be just as unable to see and report the whole story about President Obama as they were about his predecessor.

It's tiresome and such a pain that one must read seven hundred thousand press reports in order to get even a glimmer of what really happens. My personal favorite example of this is a presidential press conference. Watching one and then reading or watching reports on it is a perplexing but enlightening experience.

The attitude nonsense from Strasbourg started with something Obama said in his 'town hall' appearance. American reports have it, with surprise and some discomfort, that he criticized American arrogance toward the rest of the world. They ask why he goes abroad and disses his own country. Ah, but did he?

What Obama actually said was that BOTH sides of the Atlantic have been suffering from bad attitudes toward each other - arrogance and superiority galore - and that BOTH need to let it go and renew a vital alliance. (Full story here.) Amen. (Sometimes, should one shoot the messenger?)

Labels: ,

Permalink | 3 comment(s) | posted at 9:20 AM
To kiss or not to kiss, why or why not
It's no news and no different from usual but oh my goodness the stürm und drang over The Kiss That Wasn't. American and British press have reported on President Obama and Carla Bruni Sarkozy meeting and not kissing but how differently they seem to see it.

The background is that Michelle Obama and Carla (Mme Sarkozy) were meeting for the first time in Strassbourg because, according to the BritPress, Carla stayed away from the London G-20 gathering because she felt she would be overshadowed by Michelle as the latter's took to her first European stage. (Although another interpretation could be that Carla graciously held back in order to let Michelle have the style stage to heself.) So the leaders went on to Strassbourg, headquarters of the E.U., and the women met.

The two couples encountered each other outside the Palais Rohan. The French custom is to kiss (well, touch) both cheeks. The two presidents cheerily exchanged their kisses as the two wives did. Then Michelle crossed over and exchanged kisses with Nicolas while . . . uh-oh . . . Barack and Carla . . . what?! . . . shook hands. According to most European press reports, Carla backed off from the kiss (being the cold you-know-what that they like to portray her as). According to mos American report, Obama hesitated and apparently decided not to kiss her and then stuck out his hand to shake hers (being the unslick new guy on the European block that gossip columnists like to portray him as). Whatever the reason, they didn't do it. Oooh la la. (First Michelle puts her arm around Queen Elizabeth and then Barack does not kiss Mme Sarkozy. What obstreperous people this new first couple is, I mean, really.)

Surely it's eversomuch more important that Michelle's lacy black slip peeked out from under that nice black and white number she wore when the Obamas and the Browns stood for a photo op in front of 10 Downing Street a couple of nights ago? How come no one's freaking out over that?

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted at 9:17 AM
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
April 1
I like silliness. Last year I gave one of t2cgitw a medieval castle, one of whose little wooden characters is a colorfully-dressed court jester and I've been working on convincing her that he is at least as important to the daily enjoyment of life in the castle as the prince and his cohorts. So it's not surprising that I enjoyed April Fool's Day.

April 1st is the moment just at the end of Winter and just before Spring when people are encouraged to be sly and amusing. Not hurtful, just making people smile and laugh, perhaps at themselves, perhaps at those who are fond of them. What a wonderful idea.

One of my favorite April Fool's was when I found a gizmo (for want of a more technical term) at a little Greenwich Village store. With it, you could display a small apparently random piece of thread on the front of a garment while on the inside was a bobbin that held yards of the thread. My father was a bit obsessed with things being neat and tidy so if he saw a thread, he invariably reached and picked it off. It was a bit odd when he'd do it to strangers but he simply couldn't help himself, I guess. The first year I used the thing, he dutifully reached over and plucked, only to look a bit horrified as what seemed to be the fabric of my sweater coming apart in his fingers as a result of his attempt to restore order to my appearance. I think I was about 10 and I remember collapsing in giggles. So did he once he realized it was, yes, an April Fool's joke. Amazingly, I repeatedly used the little gadget on several April 1sts after that. Either he had an oddly faulty memory - odd for a college professor who wrote several dozen books - or very nice to his silly daughter and probably as amused as I was by the whole thing. In any case, it was lots of fun so on April 1st every year I try to do at least one silly thing, and I quite palpably miss him and his very funny, silly sense of humor. Happy April Fool's Day!

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 4 comment(s) | posted at 9:35 PM