I hope you enjoy the last hours of 2005. We get a whole extra second, too, so let's make the best of it!

Labels: anniversaries

Temper tantrum . . . nervous breakdown . . . We use the phrases interchangeably. What do you think? Same thing? Different? Please compare and contrast.

Labels: blogs (mine), writing

Many of the bloggers I enjoy on an almost daily basis have been musing about whether they'll continue or change focus or take time off or what. Several ceased during the year and several have started anew but different. Undoubtedly this is partly a side effect of the casualness of the form. And some impetus may be in a not uncommon malaise that I've noticed often settles in between the frenzy of Win-hanu-holi-kwanz-mas-rama-satur-sol-ter-kah-stice (f/k/a Christmas) and the new year. I didn't observe this phenomenon last year, however, so find myself wondering if something is afoot in blogland that's giving rise to a midwinter moment of discontent. (Am I mixing enough literary references?) It can be a quandary to decide what to write about at times, but one of the unexpected pleasures both of reading and of writing in this genre (is it a genre?) is finding joy as well as wisdom, wit and genuine insight in mundane observations and thoughts that turn out not to be mundane in the least. What's your reason for reading and/or writing blogs?

Technorati tags: blogging, happiness

Labels: blogs (mine), blogs (others')

Happy Boxing Day! In Great Britain and Canada, the day after Christmas is the official day of gift giving. And we anglophiles enjoy knowing that today has nothing to do with putting all the boxes away from yesterday but is named for the courtly custom of giving boxes of food, clothing, and other goods to employees, tradespeople, mail carriers, housekeepers, and others who have performed services for us throughout the year. It's a gracious and lovely day.

Labels: anniversaries

Note that this is meant both in jest and to celebrate all it includes. Click here for a tuneful holiday greeting.

Labels: anniversaries, silliness

Flippantly, recently, I referred to the phrase about sticks and stones breaking bones. I've reconsidered and I want to say something about it. In point of fact, words can hurt. On the one hand, in the right people's hands (er, mouths), words can please, even flatter, bolster and soothe. But some people deftly and pointedly use words to hurt either by what they say or by what they don't say. It's not the easiest thing to resist being swayed by the former or wounded by the latter. As tomorrow inexorably approaches, with the many gatherings of friends and family, it's important to remember that words spoken by close friends and family members have even more power over us. So here's my wish for everyone for tomorrow: May all the words you hear and speak be full of kindness and good will.

Labels: writing

When Mayor Bloomberg calmly stated that he was angered at the transit union workers for striking, I enjoyed the measured tone he used and I enjoyed watching him clearly verbalize his defense of his city. He pointed out the fundamental fact that public workers striking is illegal. He also said that some of their demands are completely out of line, particularly since they are for future workers. And then he said that union leaders had "thuggishly turned their backs on New York City and disgraced the noble concept of public service." Which got the union leaders all riled up and accusing him of racism. So I searched news sites for an explanation and the best I can find is that they're connecting unconnectable dots. They're jumping from union membership being three-quarters black and hispanic to the Mayor making racial slurs. Talk about reverse and bad logic. If I say Winston Churchill was a brilliant leader, does it mean I think all white men are brilliant leaders? Of course not. So why does Bloomberg's description imply anything? And just incidentally, it was Toussaint who invoked Rosa Parks' name, mentioning her bravery in defying the law when she rode the bus, thus introducing race into a discussion where it neither existed nor belongs. I guess some people will do anything for a fight.

Labels: politics, writing

The MTA isn't exactly a generous kind or admirable organization. Please understand up front that I know that. These are the guys who acknowledged keeping two sets of books, two years in a row, and a judge even ruled to that effect, and yet they went ahead and got away with increasing fares as much as 25%. It's not as if they've used all that money to clean the bathrooms or repair ripped seats, either, believe me. They're bad managers and they lie and distort with ease and impugnity. My favorite example is that trains are considered on time as long as they're no more than five minutes and fifty-nine seconds late. Huh? But they rule the commuting roost unless you're willing to drive and park, so we suck it up at least for now.

If I'm missing something, I'm more than glad to change my mind, but from what I know now I don't get why we should sympathize with people who inconvenience others because they want salaries higher than their current average of $60,000, plus 8% annual increases (!) and retirement at 55 with full benefits. Hey, why not go straight for half a million a year and retirement at 35? A WNBC article on the strike quotes one stranded worker as saying "I read their wages in the newspaper. They make like triple what I make." And yet the union says riders are in sympathy with them. Ha. Okay, maybe they only asked their friends. That would explain it because everyone I've heard expresses irritation and disgust. And it's not just getting to work that's hard; some people can't even get there at all so it might turn into a question of keeping jobs. It's unlikely that every employer will be understanding about people missing work or being really late, isn't it?

Why can they disrupt millions of others just to get attention? Oh, that's right: they can't, technically. They're being fined but they'll strike anyway. It sounds as if they want the moon and the stars and if they don't get them both, then the heck with everyone else.

Labels: politics

Update - Charles Hill at Dustbury started a discussion from this too. He added that time is a component, especially in our busy lives. And one of his commenters pointed out that some stores (Circuit City and Best Buy among them) are encouraging people to purchase online and pick up in a nearby store, thereby saving delivery charges and getting people into the physical presence of presumably-irresistible items. Dynamic change is underway. It will be interesting to see how this all evolves.

What do you think? Should local brick and mortar stores charge a "browsing fee"? I have two reasons for even thinking such a thing. One is that although shopping is not consigned to the seventh circle of hell for me (see yesterday's post), some malls are so full of really awful stores that it's just not fun to shop there. For example, the best of our three local malls (I use the word "best" very advisedly) has eighteen sneaker stores, thirty-six visor-hat stores, twelve "rave" type of clothing stores, a Sears, a Target, bunches of Limiteds and Gaps, a Filenes, a Best Buy, and an Old Navy. I'm exaggerating the numbers but the proportions are right and the downscaleness is notable. K-Mart and Wal-Mart anchor the other two malls - get the picture? Since we're less than ninety minutes from New York City, you'd think more upscale stores would be eager for our filthy lucre and build here. With the exception of two small book stores, a couple of jewelry and 'objets' stores, and three yarn stores, anything other than mall stores are an hour or more away. Noted blogger, Andrea Harris, who despises crowds and has only sparingly good things to say about the mall near her, has a store called Teavana in her mall and I am exceedingly jealous. Which leads to the second reason why I'm thinking that local stores maybe should start charging a look-and-wander fee. The only way many of us can do fabulous shopping is to shop online. Which removes the immediacy, the touching and seeing, and the fun adrenaline rush of really good search-and-find shopping. And it's unfair to the local merchants who make huge efforts but can't lower their prices. Only a small proportion of our shopping dollars are spent locally any more. We check out things like books and digital cameras in local stores - feel them, see them, weigh them, etc. - then get wider choices and better prices plus get them delivered into our hands by buying online. It's logical and understandable but seems economically and ethically icky. So what's the answer?

Labels: blogs (others'), shopping

Another irresistible online thingie (thanks to a sweet, familiar dissonance).

Labels: blogs (others'), fun

I don't want to shock or upset anyone but a speech that President Bush gave yesterday at the Woodrow Wilson Center in the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center in Washington DC differs significantly from what news outlets are reporting. It is well worth reading in its entirety (here). It was a better speech, a more carefully reasoned speech and a more interesting speech than one would expect from what one hears about it. Among other things, partly in defense of our being in Iraq at all, he pointed out that

"We were not in Iraq in 1993, when the terrorists tried to blow up the World Trade Center in New York. We were not in Iraq in 1998, when the terrorists bombed our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. We were not in Iraq in 2000, when the terrorists killed 17 American sailors aboard the USS Cole. There wasn't a single American soldier in Iraq on September the 11th, 2001, when the terrorists murdered nearly 3,000 people in the worst attack on our home since Pearl Harbor."

On this day of free and inclusive elections in Iraq, it is also worth joining in Mr Bush's call to

"honor [those who have died in Iraq] by acknowledging that their sacrifice has brought us to this moment: the birth of a free and sovereign Iraqi nation that will be a friend of the United States, and a force for good in a troubled region of the world."

Supporters, opponents and those of us who are perhaps unsure about the war - all of us - should pause for a moment today and wish them well as "the story of freedom . . . in the Middle East" takes a giant step forward.

Labels: gwb, history, politics

Do you remember the old comedy routine in which a loony psychiatrist would greet new patients warmly and then say, "sit anywhere, anywhere you like . . . " and pace watchfully as they assessed the chairs, then instantly diagnose them according to which chair they chose? It was hilarious. Anyway, David Steinberg went on to be a hugely successful comedian, writer and director (see some of his c.v. here). Tonight his new show begins on TVLand at 10 p.m. (NY time). "Sit Down Comedy" apparently evolved from lunches with comedian friends and the casual, funny result could be wonderful. I'll watch, especially on December 28 when Bob Newhart is the guest. Can you imagine the two of them together?!
Update: I enjoyed the first show. Mike Myers is witty and charming (surprise) and the show's tone is relaxed and pleasant. I'm glad they're successful but there were eighty gazillion too many commercials, which often spoiled the mood and momentum. But onward to next Wednesday with Larry Jacobs.

Technorati tags: television, hobbies, modern culture

Labels: fun, tv

The nominees for the Golden Globe awards were announced this morning. I don't want to jinx anything, so here is the entire "best actor, drama" list, for one of whom I will have my fingers crossed until January 16th (hey, a month's not all that long): Russell Crowe, "Cinderella Man"; Philip Seymour Hoffman, "Capote"; Terrence Howard, "Hustle & Flow"; Heath Ledger, "Brokeback Mountain"; David Strathairn, "Good Night, and Good Luck."You gotta figure Crowe won't win because he's too much of a "bad boy", Heath Ledger and Terrence Howard will do well but won't win because voters won't go out on those limbs until box office receipts prove it's all right (I might be very wrong there). So my guess is that it's between Philip Seymour Hoffman and David Strathairn, two serious fantastic really good actors.

I have a question, though. How did "The Squid and the Whale" get listed under "musical or comedy"? The misery and sadness that kids and parents experience before and during divorce aren't exactly laugh-a-minute hilarity. Unless Hollywood types are so far gone that they think feeling tense and sad is funny.

Labels: movies, people

As another possible/probable execution approaches, I am again troubled by conflicting feelings and thoughts. On the one hand, I believe murder is wrong. If so, then is it even worse for a State to kill in the cold light of day or night than for an individual to kill in the heat of anger? On the other hand, sometimes government must do what is essentially wrong in order to preserve the common good, which is its fundamental purpose. In this case, this man was found guilty of despicable crimes. He acknowledges establishing a gross and hate-filled gang but that is not the issue, difficult though it is to overlook. In twenty-four years he has been unable to establish the validity of a re-examination of the facts. In recent months he claims to have 'reformed' and yet he lied about writing books and fails to say positive things about what contributions he would make if not executed. He has not expressed remorse for the crimes he is said to have committed but there is logic on his side since he says he did not do them. On the other hand, he could have expressed profound regret and sadness for the deaths, but has not. He is not an upbeat or positive guy and being on death row can't have helped him develop a winning personality and that is entirely beside the point, too. If executions don't prevent crime, according to decades and heaps of statistics, they do make some people feel as if the score is a little more even. And perhaps there is no afterlife and no other time or place to punish him. But I wonder if it is government's prerogative to inflict this ultimate punishment and kill someone and assert with moral conviction that since we can therefore we will.

Labels: politics, reflections, writing

Although some craftwork described as nostalgic or intricate is a bit too homey for me, sometimes quite the opposite is true. Thanks to Complimenting Complimenter's link to at the heart of it, both of which are terrific sites, by the way, for today's discovery. Feast your eyes on the ornaments, decorations, etc. of master sculptor and painter, Jim Shore. His work reminds me of the crafts and ceramics from the thirties and forties (a la Beatrice Wood). Enjoy. (And while we're at it, a nod to the internet itself. There are wonderful delightful surprises all over this big amazing world and the internet makes it so easy to find many of them.)

Labels: blogs (others'), knitting

I like it that the world has shrunk enough that nothing seems prohibitively far away nor so inaccessibly different that there is an impossible separation between anyone, as long as we pay a small amount of attention. On the other hand, I wonder if it's going a teeny tiny bit too far when "today in history' includes two Nobel Peace Prizes, a planetary orbit, AND Dr Ruth's marriage to Mr Westheimer (except, of course, in their family where it is far MORE important) and, yesterday, William and Mary-Beth Hurt's divorce? This is also the anniversary of President Wilson's marriage to Edith Galt (in 1915) and of his being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize (in 1919). And of Edward VIII's abdication (in 1936). In 1582, today, France began using the Gregorian calendar. It may have been downhill ever since.

Labels: france, history, reflections

Awesome site, Web Gallery of Art, pointed out by awesome site-pointer-outer a sweet, familiar dissonance. In particular, check out the Concert of Angels and Nativity - what a nice combination - which apparently inspired Hindemith to create his operatic symphony, Mathis the Painter.

Labels: blogs (others'), great link(s), music

Weather. How different things can be, even at not great distances. When I left home this morning there was already 4-5 inches on the ground (8-12 predicted by noon) and it was coming down almost faster than I could get my car windows cleared. By the time I got from one side of my small compact to the other, the first window was white again. Thank heavens for wipers or I'd still be there. Sixty-five miles down the (rail)road, there's not even an inch on the ground and it seems more like thick rain than snow. Weather patterns are us.

Labels: weather

Thanks to Byzantium's Shores (via a sweet, familiar dissonance) for pointing out the Advent Calendar at Past Times, a British store that offers some great books, objets, etc. The advent calendar is an etching of a winter scene with kids playing and ice-skating, pleasant music in the background. Click on the day's date to see that day's special offer. Although it's a ten-to-fourteen day shipping time from them to us, there is still enough time before Win-hanu-holi-kwanz-mas-rama-kah-stice and, anyway, these gifts might be worth stockpiling.

Labels: blogs (others'), shopping

The first time someone told me about Trading Spouses, the reality show about two very different mothers who change places for a week, I thought it sounded silly and contrived. Now that I've watched a couple of episodes, however, I think it has something serious and instructive at its heart, knowingly or not, but I wish it didn't pull up short just when things get interesting. Tonight, a fairly contained Scandinavian/American affluent mom traded places with a laid back mom with boldly dyed red hair and a husband whose statements were shown in printed titles since he was so hard to understand. All the children were understandably apprehensive but it was the husbands who put up impermeable barriers. The redhead's daughter, an eager and pretty girl with a lot to offer, seemed to gain the most, partly as a result of trying to be friendly rather than resentful. The blonde's eldest son eventually relaxed with his "new" mom and exhibited more independence than he'd been permitted with his own mom. Watching the women try to assimilate was absorbing cinema realite, I really must admit. But during their summary get-together and their reunions with their families, the arguments and tensions always were backed away from, depriving the players as well as the viewers. Just as in real life, however, growth comes least easily from pulled punches. Hard things must be said and heard so that viewers and players can learn and see slightly newly and differently, which will allow new light to shine on (and change?) familiar (entrenched?) behaviors.

Labels: people, silliness, tv

...to Robert and Elizabeth Dole on their 30th marriage anniversary. A notable feat for anyone, let alone people in the public eye, an eye which has become so much more probing (a/k/a intrusive and rude). We're fortunate for having had them direct their humor, kindness and dedication to us all. And they apparently are fortunate to have each other. Cheers.

Labels: anniversaries, people

While I was driving to the train station this morning, Rossini's wildly energetic overture to the Barber of Seville was playing. I was reminded of two things: what a terrific movie Breaking Away is, especially the unexpected justaposition of opera and biking (thanks to Steve Tesich's screenplay); and what an extraordinary effect music can have on one's emotional and physical sense of wellbeing.

Labels: blogs (others'), movies, music

At Today's Nuze, there's a cartoon with a caption that reads

"Remember, Neal Boortz says every time someone says "Happy Holidays" an elf DIES."

I'd chuckle harder if it didn't remind me of my mother's attempt at similar humor with a tale of the brave little ice cubes who emerge from their watery birth and manage to solidify themselves, chilly and beautiful, and then immediately melt / die just so we can have cool drinks and pretty sculptures.

Labels: blogs (others'), reflections

I often wish I had the spunk and resilience of Dr Helen and Andrea Harris combined. At the moment, I would love to be able to respond brilliantly (i.e. understandingly, sympathetically, rationally, cleverly, wittily) to someone loaded with invective who says they're angry for one thing when they're really angry about something else altogether. (Yes, I'm refraining from specifics and being vague, on purpose.) I usually respond (react) to really angry words by either just leaving or dissolving in tears and giving the person whatever will stop the yelling. I know neither approach solves anything or even assuages the anger, but when my blood feels funny in my arms, I'm a goner. Sometimes it's tempting to think about becoming a hermit.

Labels: blogs (others'), reflections

Thanks to a sweet, familiar dissonance, an interesting, instructive site called The Christmas Archives that tells the history of the venerable tree with many stories and lots of wonderful drawings and photos.

Labels: anniversaries, great link(s)

DevraDoWrite muses today, as she has before, about musicians who try to shine so much that they end up detracting from the music. She believes "the greatest performers are those who understand that it is about the music, not the musician. Somehow, with that understanding and attendant devotion to the music itself, they actually become better artists." I agree with her entirely about music and musicians - although it's a mystery how that works. It's also true of most creative endeavors, don't you think? Even writing, even though the words come from oneself. There is an element of conduit or messenger even when writing what feels like something original. I remember the first time I really wrote a piece of fiction, when I re-read my pages, it was weird because it seemed to be the first time I'd seen those words and read that story. Scary but exhilarating. I've heard painters say the same thing. One must somehow learn to put ego aside. But, as DDW points out:

The catch, of course, is that as human beings we crave recognition and applause - knowing within yourself that you did the right thing or created something wonderful is just not the same as hearing the accolades. Somewhere there must be a happy balance, and searching for that 'somewhere', trying to find that balance, is part of the artist's journey.

I think this pinpoints what I dislike (and like) about some writers, musicians, singers, and painters. I realize it's an incredible difficult balance and very hard to achieve, but a satisfying and potentially gratifying quest.

Labels: blogs (others'), writing