Yeah, well. For those of you who don't know (ha ha, funny, right?), I like Doctor Who. And, of course, for anyone to "like" Doctor Who means basically becoming obsessed in one way or another, often to the point of building TARDIS replicas ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtWUrJU46M8 ) * or creating fabulous fan art (which doesn't belong to me, sorry; don't know who it does belong to, but it's brilliant so I had to share ...)
For me, it means going about saving the world in a silly British accent. Ahem.
Anywho. This site:
http://datingtipsfromthedoctor.tumblr.com/tagged/Doctor+Who
... is fantastic, brilliant, and geronimo. You want matchmaking advice? Let's get intergallactic here.
* Sorry, I'm still not computer-qualified enough to figure out how to make the words light up as a link thingy themselves ... ok, so I'm too lazy to learn. So just click on the link already.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Soooooooooo ....
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Snippet Saturday ... on Sunday!
So, I missed yesterday for snippets. Well, technically, I didn't miss it, but I posted something else (which you should read below), so I felt one long post would be enough for a day. So today, instead of posting a long post/monologue/rant/snippet/etc., I'm going to give you the link to a previous/current/comatose blog of mine that is a story but not currently going anywhere. Unfortunately. I'd like to work on it some more soon, but I'm hardly getting my English class reading done as it is, so it's probably better if I stick with that and come back to the story at some vague, undetermined, potentially non-existent point in the vague, undetermined, potentially non-existent future.
Unfortunately, you have to read the posts in anti-chronological order (i.e. start with the first post, work your way back up to the most recent -- in case you couldn't figure that out anyway), but that's the only way they go up. Trust me, I tried.
Enjoy.
http://adeathlysilence.blogspot.com/
Unfortunately, you have to read the posts in anti-chronological order (i.e. start with the first post, work your way back up to the most recent -- in case you couldn't figure that out anyway), but that's the only way they go up. Trust me, I tried.
Enjoy.
http://adeathlysilence.blogspot.com/
Saturday, January 28, 2012
America's Holocaust
"What does 'gassed' mean?"
I stood, stunned, as a teenage boy behind me in the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum asked his gum-chewing friends this unbelievable question.
Even in modern America, in our up-to-date, real-time news country, so many of us still know so little of our history, or of any history. The Holocaust was the brutal, inhumane murders of 6 million Jews, Poles, and other supposedly inferior races from 1933-1945, by German Nazis. This genocide should be something every middle-schooler (at the very youngest!) should know and understand. The Holocaust should be something that every member of a free country, who has ever heard the word "liberty" or "justice," reflects on with horror.
But those who don't know their history are doomed -- rather, they doom themselves -- to repeat it. Over the past forty years, another holocaust has been occurring, before the eyes of all the world. Over the past forty years, over 54 million individuals have been lost to the ranks of humankind. Or, in a sense, their souls were never allowed to enter the world.
Photos of the dead line the walls of the Holocaust museum. Their eyes stare out at you forever from the black and white photos, blurried, fading, behind thick glass. But think for a moment of those countless souls who never get even a photograph, whose faces are blank. They exist, for such a short moment, a flash of a point in time. They exist without a name, without a thought, without a hope for the future.
During the Holocaust of World War I, many artists, writers, musicians, scholars and scientists escaped to havens of safety, but many were killed. Their works are lost to us forever. But what of those whose works are never given the chance to be?
A title for one of the exhibitions was "Who Shall Live and Who Shall Die." We know the Nazis had no right to take innocent lives. Everyone hates Nazis for what they did to those millions of souls. But isn't this the same sort of decision the modern woman claims is hers? Isn't this exactly the same decision a woman must make when she commits abortion? She decides that this life within her, this second life which is part of her, is no longer needed. This life is an inconvenience to her and must be dealt with.
Prisoners of war are subjected to every indignity imaginable, but the abortionist will not give her child even the dignity of life.To take away another's life, another's humanity, is a cruelty and an injustice of the most enormous proportions. But to prohibit someone from ever becoming human -- how is this better? These countless souls have offended her by merely breathing.
We wonder how so many people can have been so easily misled in the ways of Nazi Germany. We look back and see clearly through the propaganda and the lies. But what of all we are told about abortion? They tell you it is clean and quick, that it won't hurt, that it will give you relief and freedom; they tell you it will release you from the burden of responsibility for another human being. But it is no coincidence that so many abortionists have finally seen the traumatizing reality of their actions?
In the Hall of Rememberance at the end of the Holocaust exhibit, we found two quotations etched above the eternal flame. Deuteronomy 4:9 tells us to remember the things we have seen, for the sake of future generations. Deuteronomy 30:19 tells us to Choose Life. Choose Life for for all races, all religions, both boys and girls, both rich and poor, in cities and in villages, in every country. You are not God; you are not given the authority to decide another's life.
This is our holocaust.This is a holocaust by all the "free" nations of the world. It does not discriminate against members of either gender, of any religion, or of any race. It is without trial, without hearing, without either justice or mercy.
Let people know the truth about abortion; let them see the reality. Let them learn their history, so that seventy years from now, no teenage girl with her mouth full of gum will stand in front of a poster of mutilated corpses of unborn children and ask, "what does 'abortion' mean?"
I stood, stunned, as a teenage boy behind me in the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum asked his gum-chewing friends this unbelievable question.
Even in modern America, in our up-to-date, real-time news country, so many of us still know so little of our history, or of any history. The Holocaust was the brutal, inhumane murders of 6 million Jews, Poles, and other supposedly inferior races from 1933-1945, by German Nazis. This genocide should be something every middle-schooler (at the very youngest!) should know and understand. The Holocaust should be something that every member of a free country, who has ever heard the word "liberty" or "justice," reflects on with horror.
But those who don't know their history are doomed -- rather, they doom themselves -- to repeat it. Over the past forty years, another holocaust has been occurring, before the eyes of all the world. Over the past forty years, over 54 million individuals have been lost to the ranks of humankind. Or, in a sense, their souls were never allowed to enter the world.
Photos of the dead line the walls of the Holocaust museum. Their eyes stare out at you forever from the black and white photos, blurried, fading, behind thick glass. But think for a moment of those countless souls who never get even a photograph, whose faces are blank. They exist, for such a short moment, a flash of a point in time. They exist without a name, without a thought, without a hope for the future.
During the Holocaust of World War I, many artists, writers, musicians, scholars and scientists escaped to havens of safety, but many were killed. Their works are lost to us forever. But what of those whose works are never given the chance to be?
A title for one of the exhibitions was "Who Shall Live and Who Shall Die." We know the Nazis had no right to take innocent lives. Everyone hates Nazis for what they did to those millions of souls. But isn't this the same sort of decision the modern woman claims is hers? Isn't this exactly the same decision a woman must make when she commits abortion? She decides that this life within her, this second life which is part of her, is no longer needed. This life is an inconvenience to her and must be dealt with.
Prisoners of war are subjected to every indignity imaginable, but the abortionist will not give her child even the dignity of life.To take away another's life, another's humanity, is a cruelty and an injustice of the most enormous proportions. But to prohibit someone from ever becoming human -- how is this better? These countless souls have offended her by merely breathing.
We wonder how so many people can have been so easily misled in the ways of Nazi Germany. We look back and see clearly through the propaganda and the lies. But what of all we are told about abortion? They tell you it is clean and quick, that it won't hurt, that it will give you relief and freedom; they tell you it will release you from the burden of responsibility for another human being. But it is no coincidence that so many abortionists have finally seen the traumatizing reality of their actions?
In the Hall of Rememberance at the end of the Holocaust exhibit, we found two quotations etched above the eternal flame. Deuteronomy 4:9 tells us to remember the things we have seen, for the sake of future generations. Deuteronomy 30:19 tells us to Choose Life. Choose Life for for all races, all religions, both boys and girls, both rich and poor, in cities and in villages, in every country. You are not God; you are not given the authority to decide another's life.
This is our holocaust.This is a holocaust by all the "free" nations of the world. It does not discriminate against members of either gender, of any religion, or of any race. It is without trial, without hearing, without either justice or mercy.
Let people know the truth about abortion; let them see the reality. Let them learn their history, so that seventy years from now, no teenage girl with her mouth full of gum will stand in front of a poster of mutilated corpses of unborn children and ask, "what does 'abortion' mean?"
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Five Reasons Why All Men Should Read "Pride and Prejudice"
Oh yes I did.
#1 Impress her.
So you think you're Brad Pitt? All that tells her is that you've got an ego a mile high and crave the limelight. Woopeedeedo for you. Want to impress her? Throw her a line from her favorite (ok, one of her million favorite) book. How about "it is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife," or "we neither of us perform before strangers," or "I now find her one of the most beautiful women of my acquaintance" or ... yeah. You get the point.
#2 It's short.
Yeah. Dude, you want to impress some girls, ya hafta, like, take the Jane Austen special seminar and write your thesis on the portrayal of aunts in all six novels, plus "Sanditon" (there's a check off the bucket list). Most girls, however, will beam in appreciation when you refer to just the one novel. Austen's "Emma" is probably 30% longer; anything by Dickens is, like, bigger than the dictionary. P&P is quick; it's funny; it's got short chapters that means you don't have to, y'know, get TOO deeply absorbed in it before the football game.
#3 Life lessons.
No matter how many history or psychology or sociology or home economics courses you take, men, there is a sad, sad truth: you will NEVER understand the femal psyche. NEVER. Not in the whole of eternity. BUT you can take a page (or two hundred) out of Austen's P&P and learn some valuable tips:
-- how NOT to propose to women (tell her you love her against your will and your reason? BAD move)
-- when "no, thank you" means "NO NO NO NO AND I COULD SAY IT ALL DAY BUT YOU STILL WONT BELIEVE ME NO"
-- how to make up for the most worst most awful most completely soul-crushingly bad mistake (e.g., ruining the marriage prospects of a most beloved sister) -- this generally involves a daring rescue of the heroine from the villain, but rescuing the heroine's sister's (another sister, not the most beloved) reputation from the villain's nefarious schemes can often work just as well
-- Nerves. Women have 'em. So just sit tight and put up with them. You will become good friends. (you and the nerves; can't promise about the girl).
#4 Character building.
Oh, come on. There are sooooooo many more painful activities I could think to suggest. So go join the army. Camp outside in Michigan winter. Pull all the hairs from your head one by one. Then get it tatooed. (ok, that is crossing from "painful character building" to "just plain stupid"). Seriously, one little novel is not going to hurt you. It might make your head hurt ("gah! real dialogue!") and might put you in need of some man-cave time ("grunt." "grunt." "grunt-grunt."), but you'll thank me for it when you're done. Y'know, like, the guys come back from a three-day hike: "What were you up to, man?" You reply with confidence, "I read 'Pride and Prejudice.'" "Woah, man, you must be, like, exhausted." "Meh," you reply. "It was peanuts. I'm gonna tackle 'Bleak House' next."
#5 Real literature.
I've heard of guys reading "Twilight" and ... well, whatever all that stuff is. Guys, sorry to break it to you, that's not real literature. (Girls, it's not real for you, either). You're not going to impress her with that (unless she's that kind of girl, and then, well ... never mind). You actually have to think when you read real stuff. Like, there have to be synapses that fire during the reading process. The brain should expand; the eyes should light up; the heart should be warmed, the soul should be moved. After reading it, the story should make you ponder the greater things in life; the work should bring you one step closer to an understanding of the human condition, one word nearer to the Great Conversation.
I know, I know, it's a lot to ask of you rough-and-tumble manly-men kind of guys, but ... just think about it. Maybe, just touch the book -- pick it up -- smell the freshly-printed leaves. You guys have your whole "new car interior" thing, we girls have the "new (or old, even better) book" thing. If you're brave, you can read the back cover. Even braver, crack it open -- just a veeerrrrry little -- and see if you can't sideways-read the first few lines. Next thing you know, she'll be standing behind you, looking over your shoulder.
"Are - are you reading that?"
"Uh, yeah. Ummm ... y'know. Jane Austen. Elizabeth Bennet, Mr. Darcy -- good stuff."
#1 Impress her.
So you think you're Brad Pitt? All that tells her is that you've got an ego a mile high and crave the limelight. Woopeedeedo for you. Want to impress her? Throw her a line from her favorite (ok, one of her million favorite) book. How about "it is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife," or "we neither of us perform before strangers," or "I now find her one of the most beautiful women of my acquaintance" or ... yeah. You get the point.
#2 It's short.
Yeah. Dude, you want to impress some girls, ya hafta, like, take the Jane Austen special seminar and write your thesis on the portrayal of aunts in all six novels, plus "Sanditon" (there's a check off the bucket list). Most girls, however, will beam in appreciation when you refer to just the one novel. Austen's "Emma" is probably 30% longer; anything by Dickens is, like, bigger than the dictionary. P&P is quick; it's funny; it's got short chapters that means you don't have to, y'know, get TOO deeply absorbed in it before the football game.
#3 Life lessons.
No matter how many history or psychology or sociology or home economics courses you take, men, there is a sad, sad truth: you will NEVER understand the femal psyche. NEVER. Not in the whole of eternity. BUT you can take a page (or two hundred) out of Austen's P&P and learn some valuable tips:
-- how NOT to propose to women (tell her you love her against your will and your reason? BAD move)
-- when "no, thank you" means "NO NO NO NO AND I COULD SAY IT ALL DAY BUT YOU STILL WONT BELIEVE ME NO"
-- how to make up for the most worst most awful most completely soul-crushingly bad mistake (e.g., ruining the marriage prospects of a most beloved sister) -- this generally involves a daring rescue of the heroine from the villain, but rescuing the heroine's sister's (another sister, not the most beloved) reputation from the villain's nefarious schemes can often work just as well
-- Nerves. Women have 'em. So just sit tight and put up with them. You will become good friends. (you and the nerves; can't promise about the girl).
#4 Character building.
Oh, come on. There are sooooooo many more painful activities I could think to suggest. So go join the army. Camp outside in Michigan winter. Pull all the hairs from your head one by one. Then get it tatooed. (ok, that is crossing from "painful character building" to "just plain stupid"). Seriously, one little novel is not going to hurt you. It might make your head hurt ("gah! real dialogue!") and might put you in need of some man-cave time ("grunt." "grunt." "grunt-grunt."), but you'll thank me for it when you're done. Y'know, like, the guys come back from a three-day hike: "What were you up to, man?" You reply with confidence, "I read 'Pride and Prejudice.'" "Woah, man, you must be, like, exhausted." "Meh," you reply. "It was peanuts. I'm gonna tackle 'Bleak House' next."
#5 Real literature.
I've heard of guys reading "Twilight" and ... well, whatever all that stuff is. Guys, sorry to break it to you, that's not real literature. (Girls, it's not real for you, either). You're not going to impress her with that (unless she's that kind of girl, and then, well ... never mind). You actually have to think when you read real stuff. Like, there have to be synapses that fire during the reading process. The brain should expand; the eyes should light up; the heart should be warmed, the soul should be moved. After reading it, the story should make you ponder the greater things in life; the work should bring you one step closer to an understanding of the human condition, one word nearer to the Great Conversation.
I know, I know, it's a lot to ask of you rough-and-tumble manly-men kind of guys, but ... just think about it. Maybe, just touch the book -- pick it up -- smell the freshly-printed leaves. You guys have your whole "new car interior" thing, we girls have the "new (or old, even better) book" thing. If you're brave, you can read the back cover. Even braver, crack it open -- just a veeerrrrry little -- and see if you can't sideways-read the first few lines. Next thing you know, she'll be standing behind you, looking over your shoulder.
"Are - are you reading that?"
"Uh, yeah. Ummm ... y'know. Jane Austen. Elizabeth Bennet, Mr. Darcy -- good stuff."
Labels:
authors,
books,
life,
matchmaking,
quotations,
references
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Quotation #2: Plato, "Paramenides"
"Then the one which is not, if it is to maintain itself, must ahve the being of not-being as the bond of not-being, just as being must have as a bond the not-being of not-being in order to perfect its own being; for the truest assertion of the being of being and of the not-being of not-being is when being partakes of the being of being, and not of the being of not-being -- that is,the perfection of being; and when not-being does not partake of the not-being of not-being but of the being of not-being -- that is the perfection of not-being."
Ahem. Now tell me that English is an easy subject. Anyone else wanna try understanding this?
Ahem. Now tell me that English is an easy subject. Anyone else wanna try understanding this?
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Snippet Saturday: Snippet #1
Well. It is Saturday, and hopefully everyone is able to spend much of the morning in bed, so you don't have to read this for a while. Truth is, as a rule, I let nobody read my stuff. Call it vanity, call it lack of confidence, call it the perfectionist syndrome, but there is something terribly nerve-wracking about letting anyone else's eyes fall over the words I have so painstakingly chosen, arranged, and formed into a story. But I feel that as a hypothetical writer, I really ought to let real people see the stuff before attempting to fling it out onto an unsuspecting public. Please do comment, thoughtfully, truthfully, critically; saying you love it is flattering, but not particularly helpful in improving it. "And I intend to improve in many directions," as good heavens Gwendolyn so aptly states.
Ahem.
***
The thoughts, descriptions, and dialogue which appear here are taken from my story currently entitled Lady Georgiana, set sometime in the early 19th century in England. I must warn you: all
characters, events, and locations portrayed in this story are purely fictional.
Please do not be so rude as to discredit the author's creativity, or so vain as to
think she found your personality fascinating enough to bestow it upon an
immortal fictional character.
Ahem.
***
Sir Basil Biggeldy sat in his
chair at the breakfast table and scowled at the world. It was not to his liking
today, and it never was. The breakfast was not to his liking; the cold floor
upon his thin-skinned feet was not to his liking either. His valet was slow;
his housemaid a nuisance for spilling his tea. The servant girls ran about
screaming and flapping their arms like a couple of disturbed seagulls, and Sir
Basil, in his infinite wisdom and knowledge, could not for the life of him
imagine whatever for. The sun shone too brightly in his eyes as he sat down to
a cold and rubbery egg; yet when the valet closed the drapes, he closed them
too tightly, leaving Sir Basil to shiver in the cold of the shade. He would not
stand for this; so he stood up and hurried out to his study, with a dignified
air and an empty belly, growling at the world. It was not going to be a
pleasant day, and it never was.
Sir Basil sat in his chair in his
study and scowled at the world. Such papers, such work! And it was all his
responsibility! Was he responsible for all the world, and all its problems? Was
he the only man alive left to bring the world to its senses? He asked himself
these and other such pressing questions each morning, but since the day his
valet unwisely attempted to answer them (in a jocular, painfully lighthearted
sort of manner - stupid man), the questions remained unanswered, though never
unspoken. Such was his life.
...
Frank helped Sir Basil dress, and
it was thus three quarters of an hour later that the gentleman stepped outside
his front door to take in the air. The air rarely agreed with him, but it was
on such days as this, when nothing agreed with him, that the air provided a
suitable diversion from the pains of indoors, and confronted Sir Basil with a
novelty over which to gripe and groan. He tread heavily around the house to see
his kennels, but the sharp yapping of a new litter made him wince and turn back
to see the gardens. He strolled through the flowers, his head bent, his back
bent, his nose bent; he saw nothing, heard nothing, smelled nothing, but walked
his routine walk with as much eagerness as a polar bear at the sight of an ice
cube. The flowers were not there for his pleasure; they were there for his
niece and her daughter, for the women would insist that "something must be done"
to put color into the grounds. He did not want color in his life - he did not
like color - but if they insisted, he could but allow the color in the grounds,
as long as it did not interfere with his sleeping or his reading or his walks.
He knew the paths by heart, and so he did not need to even open his eyes and
confront the bright and sprightly colors as they danced across the yard.
Sir Basil was never known to be
fond of flowers, or children, or women in general (their speech was painful to
his ears), but he did have a sort of something, which amounted to an emotion
similar in nature to a fondness for his brother's daughter. Prudence was,
convincingly, prudent; a quiet child, from an early age; not eager to run or
jump or shout as others did, but more interested in sitting and hearing him
speak, or looking at the pictures in a book. She was always a curious child,
absorbing much more than she would let out, but for this Sir Basil was
grateful, as he could turn his attentions to her instead of to her bombastic
siblings during family visits. He watched with a certain sort of pleasure as
she grew from a small girl to a lovely young woman, and though he may not have
expressed as much, he did love her, in his own sort of way. For her wedding (to
a decent enough sort of fellow, though one whom Sir Basil could never
understand, and one whom held none of the charms which Sir Basil had thought
attractive to a young woman), he gave the couple a handsome present of a clock,
which remained since then in their drawing room, and which Sir Basil took to
admiring each time he stepped through their doors.
He would not impose upon them too
frequently, oh no; he could not afford to be away from his own home too long,
for fear the servants would drink all the cellars dry and run amok through the
halls with the crystal chandeliers; he could only imagine the horrors they
might enact if left to their own devices. But for special occasions, he would
make the drive, and as their daughter grew through the years, the visits became
more pleasant and relaxed for him. He could speak to the new child, and she
would not understand, but she would listen, nearly as attentively as her
mother; indeed, Georgiana certainly inherited her mother's intelligence. Though
she would listen, she had also inherited her father's impatience and overly
eager interest in life outdoors, and it was not long before the one-sided
conversation fell apart, and the small girl stood up cooing to look outside the
window and see if she could find some other thing of interest. At times, in
momentary fits of generosity, Sir Basil would lead her by the hand into the
foreign outdoors, and together they would roam through the gardens, or visit
his kennels, or perhaps her parents' stables, and listen to the animals and the
flowers and the sky. Sir Basil never understood these conversations, but he
appreciated the child's ability, and he wondered - occasionally, when the fit
would take him - what it was they were all saying.
Sir Basil sat curled up by his
library fire (after a quarter of an hour’s worth of fresh air, he was more than
willing to return to the comfort of the indoors) and wondered whether Georgiana
might not come today. She would come, on occasion, though not frequently
enough. She had things to do, her mother said; but Sir Basil could not
understand what a gentleman's daughter, a young girl of eighteen, could
possibly have to do besides sit indoors and knit, or read, or play the
pianoforte? Indeed, he could not fathom. Such a delicate creature too! No
daughter of his (if he had ever had the misfortune to have a daughter) would be
found occupied in any other way. Sir Basil wondered with vague terror whether
she spent much time in the bracing air or leaping about on those monstrous
creatures her father called horses. That Blakeney fellow, always so confident
in himself. What Sir Basil wouldn’t give to teach that young fellow a lesson …
but his aggressive musings were cut short by the arrival of Georgiana Blakeney herself.
“Hello, Uncle Basil,” and she
leaned down to give him a kiss. He muttered a greeting, then handed her a book.
“I’ve left my reading glasses
upstairs,” he made the excuse, but Georgiana knew that, even with the glasses,
his eyes were too poorly to sustain such a reading habit as his. Obligingly,
she took up the book and began to read. Within minutes, he groaned, but said
nothing. A few minutes later, he groaned again, and indicated that she stop.
“Your voice hasn’t the same quality,” he sighed. From beneath the layers of
quilt, only his nose and closed eyes were visible. “You really ought to
practice – or take lessons – or something, my dear; I don’t know how your
parents allow you to speak with such pronounced Ts and swallowed vowels. Really
such a shame.”
Georgiana did not know how to
answer this.
“You should hear Tilly Baker
sometime,” his voice grew almost enthusiastic, and beneath the quilts his hand
motioned as if to explain. “She has a lovely voice, most lovely; her rendition
of Pericles’ speech is quite stirring. Perhaps you know her?”
“I’m afraid not.”
“She’s the niece of Mrs.
Gregson.” Mrs. Gregson was Sir Basil’s housekeeper, and never a particular
friend to Georgiana. “Lives down the crooked lane between the Strand and Cherry
Street, as I understand. She comes by sometimes to help her aunt with little
things about the house, and when I’m tired she comes and reads to me. Such a
good-natured child. Always so patient with an old man,” he coughed for
emphasis. “You would do well to make the acquaintance of Tilly Baker, my fine
lady. Never too fine a lady to make friends with the people, as I always say.”
“I’ve never heard you say that
before.”
“That’s because you never
listen,” and he coughed again. “Now be a good girl, and send Frank in to me,
and run along home. You’ve had enough Thucydides for one day, I should think.”
Labels:
authors,
my stories,
quotations,
references,
snippets,
words
Friday, January 20, 2012
Murder, Matchmaking, Mozzarella, and Mayhem
I have been asked to discuss murder, matchmaking, and cheese, as they appear as labels for the first post. The request was made in the hope that the three were somehow connected. I can't say that I had ever envisioned such a conjunction, but ... here goes.
I must confess: cheese is most likely my favorite food group. I can't claim to be a connoisseur, but there is something about the smell and the taste and the texture ... ahhhh. Cheese.
My friends know my sense of smell fails miserably on most occasions, but when it comes to cheese -- or old books -- it snaps right back to attention. Odd, isn't it? Perhaps there is something about the rich, musty, aged-in-a-cool-dry-place atmosphere that connects the two. If you've ever walked into an old library, or a cheese shop, you know what I mean. There was a little place in Oxford ...
But I digress.
Cheese is well known as a lure for mice. It has been successfully used to also trap Frenchmen, Wisconsinites, ... and, well, me. Tell me you're taking me out to a cheese shop, and I will go with you to the ends of the earth. I'll most likely bore you to death raving over cheddar, mozzarella, parmesan, colby jack, monterey jack, pepper jack, swiss, bleu, muenster, brie, havarti, cranberry wensleydale ...
Bored to death? Does that count as murder? Might consider that for a mystery story -- but we can come back to that.
Of course, along the way we will certainly discuss the usual array of sealing wax, ships, and shoes, and somewhere in the conversation one of us (or both of us) will begin The Topic of matchmaking. It's in my blood; I come from a long line of distinguished matchmakers. I even have a matchmaking degree from the ... Yentl School of Matchmakers. Yes. Well. It's a fascinating topic, don't you think? It's the study of human nature in a complementary pair. And of course, real-life subjects for study abound all over campus. *GRIN*
So, there. Means and motive for murder of ... oh. Well. Anyone who drives people absurd by setting them up with friends, has a penchant for parmesan, and goes traveling with aliens.
But THAT is another post.
I must confess: cheese is most likely my favorite food group. I can't claim to be a connoisseur, but there is something about the smell and the taste and the texture ... ahhhh. Cheese.
My friends know my sense of smell fails miserably on most occasions, but when it comes to cheese -- or old books -- it snaps right back to attention. Odd, isn't it? Perhaps there is something about the rich, musty, aged-in-a-cool-dry-place atmosphere that connects the two. If you've ever walked into an old library, or a cheese shop, you know what I mean. There was a little place in Oxford ...
But I digress.
Cheese is well known as a lure for mice. It has been successfully used to also trap Frenchmen, Wisconsinites, ... and, well, me. Tell me you're taking me out to a cheese shop, and I will go with you to the ends of the earth. I'll most likely bore you to death raving over cheddar, mozzarella, parmesan, colby jack, monterey jack, pepper jack, swiss, bleu, muenster, brie, havarti, cranberry wensleydale ...
Bored to death? Does that count as murder? Might consider that for a mystery story -- but we can come back to that.
Of course, along the way we will certainly discuss the usual array of sealing wax, ships, and shoes, and somewhere in the conversation one of us (or both of us) will begin The Topic of matchmaking. It's in my blood; I come from a long line of distinguished matchmakers. I even have a matchmaking degree from the ... Yentl School of Matchmakers. Yes. Well. It's a fascinating topic, don't you think? It's the study of human nature in a complementary pair. And of course, real-life subjects for study abound all over campus. *GRIN*
So, there. Means and motive for murder of ... oh. Well. Anyone who drives people absurd by setting them up with friends, has a penchant for parmesan, and goes traveling with aliens.
But THAT is another post.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Quote: Orson Welles
"If you want a happy ending, that depends, of course, on where you stop your story."
~ Orson Welles
It's a fascinating concept. Most "happy" stories stop with a wedding -- or even just a promise of one. A tragedy ends with the death of the protagonist, and often other characters as well. To tell the story of Cinderella (the quintessential happy-ending story) as a tragedy would be either to allow something tragic to separate her and the prince for ever, and never allow them to meet, or to continue the story and show what happens after the royal wedding.
Imagine Cinderella with two -- or three -- or fourteen runny-nosed children. Imagine her prince making war against a neighboring country. Imagine the two of them in a mid-life crisis, gaining weight, losing hair, stressing over the kingdom and the children and their unfulfilled lives. Eventually, they will both die, and the writer must ask himself: was this a happy ending?
Do we ever find a happy story that ends with the death of a protagonist?* Are we to believe that life cannot run its course without dreading the end? Isn't it light, not darkness, that comes at the end of the tunnel? Call me morbid, but there is something terribly unsatisfying about a happy-end story. It's just not life. Don't get me wrong; I shriek with delight just as loudly as any other girl when Elizabeth Bennet *finally* accepts Mr. Darcy. But ... what happens next? We all assume they move to Pemberley and live out the rest of their days in relative comfort and contentment (except for the occasional social visit from the other female Bennets, or the good-gracious-me Lady Catherine de Bourgh). But this is only the beginning of their life together. Can they not continue to be happy through the next forty/sixty/eighty years?
Perhaps it all comes back to the question: what is happiness? Something, I believe, that is to be found in better worlds than this, at least. The happy-end story allows us to enjoy the happiness of a moment, and stops us there with that thought in mind; the other ups and downs of life follow silently, behind the scenes. That shouldn't keep us from enjoying those happy moments, but the two must go together, arm-in-arm. If there were no mountains and valleys in the way of stories, life would be dull and plain indeed.
* Cyrano de Bergerac (and the like) does not count. Much too bittersweet an ending. I'm talking about a happy-warm-fuzzy-feeling sort of ending that makes you want to go hug people and cry with joy and stuff your mouth with marshmallows.
~ Orson Welles
It's a fascinating concept. Most "happy" stories stop with a wedding -- or even just a promise of one. A tragedy ends with the death of the protagonist, and often other characters as well. To tell the story of Cinderella (the quintessential happy-ending story) as a tragedy would be either to allow something tragic to separate her and the prince for ever, and never allow them to meet, or to continue the story and show what happens after the royal wedding.
Imagine Cinderella with two -- or three -- or fourteen runny-nosed children. Imagine her prince making war against a neighboring country. Imagine the two of them in a mid-life crisis, gaining weight, losing hair, stressing over the kingdom and the children and their unfulfilled lives. Eventually, they will both die, and the writer must ask himself: was this a happy ending?
Do we ever find a happy story that ends with the death of a protagonist?* Are we to believe that life cannot run its course without dreading the end? Isn't it light, not darkness, that comes at the end of the tunnel? Call me morbid, but there is something terribly unsatisfying about a happy-end story. It's just not life. Don't get me wrong; I shriek with delight just as loudly as any other girl when Elizabeth Bennet *finally* accepts Mr. Darcy. But ... what happens next? We all assume they move to Pemberley and live out the rest of their days in relative comfort and contentment (except for the occasional social visit from the other female Bennets, or the good-gracious-me Lady Catherine de Bourgh). But this is only the beginning of their life together. Can they not continue to be happy through the next forty/sixty/eighty years?
Perhaps it all comes back to the question: what is happiness? Something, I believe, that is to be found in better worlds than this, at least. The happy-end story allows us to enjoy the happiness of a moment, and stops us there with that thought in mind; the other ups and downs of life follow silently, behind the scenes. That shouldn't keep us from enjoying those happy moments, but the two must go together, arm-in-arm. If there were no mountains and valleys in the way of stories, life would be dull and plain indeed.
* Cyrano de Bergerac (and the like) does not count. Much too bittersweet an ending. I'm talking about a happy-warm-fuzzy-feeling sort of ending that makes you want to go hug people and cry with joy and stuff your mouth with marshmallows.
Labels:
books,
life,
philosophy,
quotations,
references,
words
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Weird/Wacky/Wonderful Word Wednesday: Word #1: Paracosm
[Forgive the alliteration; is it too painful? And it isn't even Wednesday. Oh well ...]
Paracosm: ... actually, the online OED doesn't give a definition for this. Rather odd ... let me look somewhere else.
... [Jeopardy theme music] ...
Well, dictionary.com calls it:
a prolonged fantasy world invented by children; can have a definite geography and language and history
And, essentially, I'd agree. It is, more or less, the "imaginary friend" syndrome, only with a whole world. I believe Agatha Christie and James M. Barrie are thought to be among authors who created worlds as children. I would add J. R. R. Tolkien to the list as well, as he is known to have begun work on Middle Earth sometime in his early teens. And look where that took him ...
It's a fascinating concept, and a wonderful, wacky world, and I challenge you to use it sometime in regular conversation within the next twenty four hours. Spring it on friends, family, coworkers, or the guy who sits next to you on the Metro. It sounds impressive, at least.
Paracosm: ... actually, the online OED doesn't give a definition for this. Rather odd ... let me look somewhere else.
... [Jeopardy theme music] ...
Well, dictionary.com calls it:
a prolonged fantasy world invented by children; can have a definite geography and language and history
And, essentially, I'd agree. It is, more or less, the "imaginary friend" syndrome, only with a whole world. I believe Agatha Christie and James M. Barrie are thought to be among authors who created worlds as children. I would add J. R. R. Tolkien to the list as well, as he is known to have begun work on Middle Earth sometime in his early teens. And look where that took him ...
It's a fascinating concept, and a wonderful, wacky world, and I challenge you to use it sometime in regular conversation within the next twenty four hours. Spring it on friends, family, coworkers, or the guy who sits next to you on the Metro. It sounds impressive, at least.
The Brontes
Just last night, I made a reference to Jane Eyre (y'know, wives in the attic ...) and I think, of some six or seven friends, only one caught it (... oh. You don't know). I was shocked. But then I realized, not everyone in the world -- or even in my small, conservative, literary-minded group of friends -- has read every book I have, as many times as I have. *cough* Jane Eyre: upwards of four times. Including in French. *cough*
The Bronte sisters were three sister-writers in the nineteenth century. Emily became famous for Wuthering Heights, Anne became famous for The Tenant of Wildfeld Hall, and Charlotte became famous for Jane Eyre. Their books were originally published under masculine pseudonyms to more easily attract attention (and respect) from publishers. Supposedly, as children, they created a paracosm together, which rather encouraged their individual literary developments of romanticism and the Gothic.
This http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NKXNThJ610 is a rather eye-opening and amusing ... ummm ... advertisement for the Brontes. Not quite sure how the sisters would have reacted to this, but ... I thought it interesting. So enjoy.
The Bronte sisters were three sister-writers in the nineteenth century. Emily became famous for Wuthering Heights, Anne became famous for The Tenant of Wildfeld Hall, and Charlotte became famous for Jane Eyre. Their books were originally published under masculine pseudonyms to more easily attract attention (and respect) from publishers. Supposedly, as children, they created a paracosm together, which rather encouraged their individual literary developments of romanticism and the Gothic.
This http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NKXNThJ610 is a rather eye-opening and amusing ... ummm ... advertisement for the Brontes. Not quite sure how the sisters would have reacted to this, but ... I thought it interesting. So enjoy.
The Kindle
Yes, I own a Kindle. Now, before you traditional-radical bibliophile extremists have me burned in effigy for such a heinous crime against the sacred written word, let me explain. No, that will take too long. Let me sum up.
First point: I did not buy my Kindle. It was a gift from the Polar Bear.* And he, of all people, ought to know whether a gift is a good thing or not.
Second point: I did, in fact, request the Kindle, for various and diverse reasons.
(A), I am taking an independent study this semester on the Future of the Book: where the book is going in the digital age, whether the digital text (downloaded to reading device, laptop, and phone alike) will replace the paper-and-ink tomes/doorstops, what will happen to our brains after so many hours of reading off a six-inch screen, etc. It should prove a fascinating study.
Two, I rather fancied the idea of carrying around three thousand books in my purse (talk about bigger on the inside). Yes, you heard that right: THREE THOUSAND BOOKS. That's 3,000 brilliant works by all the best authors in the world, and then some. I don't know whether I have even three hundred books to my name ... let me go see.
...[Jeopardy theme song]...
Well. By my estimation, I have some 200 books at home, and possibly another fifty here in the dorm. This 250 is a genous estimation as well, so ... can you even imagine twelve times that number? I would literally have nowhere to sleep at night if I had to fit them all into my room. But with the Kindle, my book collection has, already in the past month, absolutely exploded exponentially. All the good stuff (or at least, 99% of it) is public domain, which means all my friends -- Dickens, Austen, Doyle, Wodehouse, Christie, Sayers, Chesterton, and the rest of the gang -- can now travel with me wherever I choose to take them, with no fuss and no hassle and no dubiously-raised eyebrows from TSA guards at the zillion-ton carry-on bag which functions as my travelling library.
Six, it's just cool. The Kindle is, in my humblest of opinions, the incarnation of an oxymoron, and who doesn't think oxymorons are cool? Ok, well, you can just go ... somewhere else.
So, tell me what you think. Do you own a Kindle or Nook? Do you want one? Do you think the coming of the Kindle will kill off conventional ... (trying to find an alliteration and failing miserably) reading? Having used the Kindle a little already, I have formed my opinions -- but I would like to hear from you and see what you think too.
Yours literally,
~ Catherine
* If you have not already made his acquaintance, you will most likely find him somewhere in the Father Christmas Letters (see sidebar, under "Perfect Pairings"). He is an absolute dear, although rather frequently quite a bear, and I would highly recommend your seeking him out.
First point: I did not buy my Kindle. It was a gift from the Polar Bear.* And he, of all people, ought to know whether a gift is a good thing or not.
Second point: I did, in fact, request the Kindle, for various and diverse reasons.
(A), I am taking an independent study this semester on the Future of the Book: where the book is going in the digital age, whether the digital text (downloaded to reading device, laptop, and phone alike) will replace the paper-and-ink tomes/doorstops, what will happen to our brains after so many hours of reading off a six-inch screen, etc. It should prove a fascinating study.
Two, I rather fancied the idea of carrying around three thousand books in my purse (talk about bigger on the inside). Yes, you heard that right: THREE THOUSAND BOOKS. That's 3,000 brilliant works by all the best authors in the world, and then some. I don't know whether I have even three hundred books to my name ... let me go see.
...[Jeopardy theme song]...
Well. By my estimation, I have some 200 books at home, and possibly another fifty here in the dorm. This 250 is a genous estimation as well, so ... can you even imagine twelve times that number? I would literally have nowhere to sleep at night if I had to fit them all into my room. But with the Kindle, my book collection has, already in the past month, absolutely exploded exponentially. All the good stuff (or at least, 99% of it) is public domain, which means all my friends -- Dickens, Austen, Doyle, Wodehouse, Christie, Sayers, Chesterton, and the rest of the gang -- can now travel with me wherever I choose to take them, with no fuss and no hassle and no dubiously-raised eyebrows from TSA guards at the zillion-ton carry-on bag which functions as my travelling library.
Six, it's just cool. The Kindle is, in my humblest of opinions, the incarnation of an oxymoron, and who doesn't think oxymorons are cool? Ok, well, you can just go ... somewhere else.
So, tell me what you think. Do you own a Kindle or Nook? Do you want one? Do you think the coming of the Kindle will kill off conventional ... (trying to find an alliteration and failing miserably) reading? Having used the Kindle a little already, I have formed my opinions -- but I would like to hear from you and see what you think too.
Yours literally,
~ Catherine
* If you have not already made his acquaintance, you will most likely find him somewhere in the Father Christmas Letters (see sidebar, under "Perfect Pairings"). He is an absolute dear, although rather frequently quite a bear, and I would highly recommend your seeking him out.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Welcome to the Growlery
Well. Welcome to the Growlery.
It is not that my soul is digital - far from it. I don't think anyone who has ever spoken five minutes with me would peg me as a computer geek. But the collection of one's writings, musings, ramblings, et. al. certainly must reflect one's soul, and flinging all such thoughts and words into cyberspace -- well, this is the expression of a soul in computerized form (talk about modern media). An oxymoron? Very probably. But the oxymoron is a fabulous trick of language, and one to practice well, so practice it I will.
The Growlery is, if you will, the room in my head. It is the room in which I sit, wrapped in down comforters in front of a roaring wood fire, with books lining the walls and the snow falling about outside. I retreat from the crunch and chaos of work, and the worry and brain-wracking of grown-up concerns, and the thought-deafening noise of people. Here I sit and and read and think and write. Occasionally I break into song. Or poetry. Or ravings. Or rantings. So beware. But do drop by sometime, and we'll have tea; we can watch the snow fall outside while we discuss period dramas, matchmaking, philosophy, Hobbs, Calvin, murder, travel, cheese, white tigers, ships, sealing wax, shoes, classical music and aliens. And books, I suppose ...
So. Welcome to the Growlery.
It is not that my soul is digital - far from it. I don't think anyone who has ever spoken five minutes with me would peg me as a computer geek. But the collection of one's writings, musings, ramblings, et. al. certainly must reflect one's soul, and flinging all such thoughts and words into cyberspace -- well, this is the expression of a soul in computerized form (talk about modern media). An oxymoron? Very probably. But the oxymoron is a fabulous trick of language, and one to practice well, so practice it I will.
The Growlery is, if you will, the room in my head. It is the room in which I sit, wrapped in down comforters in front of a roaring wood fire, with books lining the walls and the snow falling about outside. I retreat from the crunch and chaos of work, and the worry and brain-wracking of grown-up concerns, and the thought-deafening noise of people. Here I sit and and read and think and write. Occasionally I break into song. Or poetry. Or ravings. Or rantings. So beware. But do drop by sometime, and we'll have tea; we can watch the snow fall outside while we discuss period dramas, matchmaking, philosophy, Hobbs, Calvin, murder, travel, cheese, white tigers, ships, sealing wax, shoes, classical music and aliens. And books, I suppose ...
So. Welcome to the Growlery.
Labels:
aliens,
cheese,
growlery,
matchmaking,
murder,
philosophy,
poetry,
tea,
tigers,
travel
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
