It's hard to believe that 2006 is drawing to a close. Like most years, there were wonderful things and sad things, difficult things and fall-into-place things. For me, a balanced year, over all, I am grateful and happy to say. I hope it was for you, too. I'll verbalize more thought-out and detailed reflections later this week. Today, it's enough to say that I wish a calm, positive, family- and friends-filled 2007 with understanding, growth and satisfaction for each of us.

Labels: reflections

As longish-time, rare though they may be, readers of jmbm know, I am often struck by juxtapositions. I enjoy noting and/or making connections between events and people and things. Yeah, okay, sometimes I stretch a bit to make the connection, but it amuses me. Anyway, at the moment there are two recently deceased well-known Americans lying in state: James Brown, the putative father of soul, and Gerald Ford, the pardoner of Nixon. I've been wracking my brain off and on all day, trying to make a connection between the fact that our news is filled with both their leave-takings at the exact same moment as we also take leave of this year called two thousand and six. I cannot make anything of it, hard though I am trying. Nothing I can think of is similar: not their personalities (quiet and mellow / wild and exhuberant), not their influence (reputedly a healer after Watergate / a musical innovator), not their energy (again: mellow / wild), not their wives (upper middle class and very proper albeit innovative in some ways / several wives and rarely calm or even remotely "proper"), not their images (staid and stately and calm / dynamic and punchy and rousing). I could go on but it's making me crazy because I want to find something to tie them together, or at least tie our experience of their leave-taking together. Maybe I'll dream something about this, tonight....

Labels: farewells, juxtapositions

My friend introduced me to "Top Chef" the other night during Bravo's 1st season marathon. As if I needed another competitive reality show in my life! Nevertheless, it was absolutely mesmerizing to watch the emotional ups and downs, food preparation, diners' assessments, etc., etc. I can't wait for the 2nd season marathon, now.

Labels: tv

Busy few days with guests and activities galore. I have to say that I really enjoy the only-slightly-contained chaos of visiting friends and children. Of course, there are occasional downsides such as when a handmade push toy duck that I bought almost forty years ago and which has survived being played with by two half generations of children was snapped in two by a seriously roughhousing child. I kept murmuring to myself, "It's just a toy . . . material things don't really matter . . . It's just a toy . . . material things don't matter" . . . and that got me through the first moment without bursting into tears or yelling, but I am very sad. Today we went to a local children's museum which was fantastic fun (Morse code, stand-inside bubble, dinosaur table, walk-through Revolutionary village, etc., etc.). And I loved hosting a mid-afternoon get-together yesterday and dinner tonight. I don't know why I enjoy modified mayhem, but I do. And I hope everyone else is having a good week too.

Labels: about me, children, shopping

Gift giving this year has been more irritating to me than usual, as I keep saying. In my younger days, I gave presents that I hoped would demonstrate how clever I was about "getting" the recipient's character and/or wishes, and would also, as a logical byproduct, get people like me or even love me more. The unavoidable consequence, over the years, was that then I had to live up to being a perceptive and generous gift-giver, so the pressure got worse. Now I'm feeling resentful about spending so much money and time on gifts for people who probably won't be per- or dis- suaded from their feelings about me by these superficial means.

Alan Sullivan at Seablogger writes about this subject that

The custom of gift-giving at Christmas has a curious psychology, if you stop to think about it. After all, the infant incarnation is a divine gift to humankind. When we give gifts in commemoration, we arrogate to ourselves the role of God. No wonder people get stressed by holiday preparations.

How people handle the gift dilemma says a great deal about their character. The loving choose gifts that fulfill wishes of recipients, rightly or wrongly perceived. Controllers give what they think the recipient ought to want. The self-obsessed give what matters to them. The selfish opt out.

I want to learn to give fewer gifts and to care less about their effect. It's not easy.

Labels: about me, food, shopping

It's been an interesting few days for me because I've been feeling more irritated than usual about the commercialism while - at the same time - being aware of more generosity and sweetness than usual, too. Shopkeepers seemed exceptionally pleasant and nice this year, colleagues warmer, many friends more full of good wishes. The crowning moment came in my local Stop 'n' Shop grocery store around 4 in the afternoon on Christmas Eve. The p.a. system came on and the store manager wished everyone a happy and healthy holiday, however we choose to celebrate. I was waiting for some announcement about closing soon so hurry up and shop, when instead he paused and seemed to smile before saying "and if I may have your attention for one more moment, 'Twas the Night Before Christmas and all through the house not a creature was stirring, not even a mouse. . . . " He went on to read the whole thing. Everyone in the store was listening to the familiar words, although it's longer and more detailed than most of us knew. judging by the looks of surprise at some lines. Registers seemed quieter, carts seemed less noisy and everyone passed each other with a smile and a nod, mouthing "merry christmas". A lovely special moment. About ten moments, actually, and when it was done, we all sighed a little wistfully because the magic was over. Then we applauded and someone even shouted "Encore!" It was a wonderful way to begin Christmas Eve evening and I'm thankful I was there.

Labels: holidays, reflections, s.p.e.e.d.ing

Panicking, shopping, family-and-friends-ing, eating, smiling, trying not to panic partly by remembering what it's all about really, enjoying children's excitement, driving around town admiring displays and lights, holding 5-week-old, cooking, staying up all night wrapping . . . . . . . A very happy Christmas Eve to you and me and mine and yours!!

Labels: holidays, shopping

While driving from pillar to post today, doing shopping preparation leading up to Christmas Eve, I chanced upon a new (to me) wine store, Vino 100, in Newburgh, NY. Fantastic location on the waterfront, nicely laid out inside, knowledgeable and friendly staff and owner, super prices, local wines as well as interesting and unusual wines. Very exciting discovery. I also went to the Cornwall Yarn Shop and Fiddlestix Cafe in Cornwall, NY. The yarn shop is well stocked with yarns of nearly every kind, loads of books and patterns, and includes a weaving component that is enthralling and delightful. The cafe has some of the best and most innovating and unusual home cooking I've had in years, from omelettes with caramelized onions to gourmet pizza and sandwiches to homebaked pies. I also went shopping and made a dent in what's left to buy as well as in my hysterics. Now, however, I'm starting to panic again. The good news is that time will inexorably march along and pass right through gift giving days. The bad news is that there is no way I will have enough and/or adequate gifts for everyone who matters. Good attitude. Not.

Labels: food, holidays, places

I love making note of people born on the same day. Then I gaze into space and ponder what they have in common. More accurately, I force something to occur to me that they have in common. Today is Charles de Gaulle and Diane Sawyer (what, besides stiff upper lips?), Abigail Adams and Lady Bird Johnson (hmm, both were president's wives and looked a little alike), Ralph Fiennes and Geraldine Page and Barbara Billingsley and Hector Elizondo (all wonderful actors), George Eliot and Andre Gide (both grand novelists), Hoagy Carmichael and Benjamin Britten (both wrote highly respected music but I love one and loathe the other), Doris Duke (the same exact day as Lady Bird . . . wonder what I can make of that?), Steve Garvey and many baseball, football and golf stars, Jean-Michel Basquiat (more out there than the others today), etc., etc. Interesting.

Labels: juxtapositions, people

Not sure which of the various things I did made it happen, but this page loads light years faster now than it has for quite a while. I went on a clean-up-the-code spree and I guess something was a good thing to do. One of these days I may even settle on a color scheme I like enough to leave alone for a while. I suppose pigs may fly and ducks may talk English someday, too.

Labels: blogs (mine), web design

Interesting post followed by exceptionally interesting comments at Bookworm yesterday, on Jimmy Carter and his remarks about things that may or may not have happened the way he describes them. With nearly 300 comments, it's not a quick in-and-out read, but it's a pleasure to have one's thoughts provoked.

Labels: blogs (others'), books

Interesting developments at Best Buy, reported today by Laura who muses. Sure would be great if this reflects a trend. Back in the day when I worked at a bookstore, customer service was "the" thing. I hated having to be nice to really nasty people like the guy who threw a large art book at us, but as a shopper I return over and over to places where the staff is helpful, knowledgeable and pleasant (and avoid those that are not). So this is terrifically good news.

Labels: modern culture

I was just at a computer where the display was set very differently from mine. Same pixel dimensions but larger dpi and therefore larger display. It was not at all what I mean it to look like - nor as stunningly lovely as it looks on my screen of course.

Labels: blogs (mine), web design

Only 4 shopping days left. Who invented this seasonal craziness anyway?

Labels: holidays, shopping

Since I've written here about some unusual (read: weird) people I've met on my commutes, and probably will do so again, I should also mention it when I meet someone interesting and not at all weird. Good conversation, upbeat attitude, strong family ties, terrific sense of humor. Sometimes I'm downright glad I get to spend ninety minutes on my commute.

Labels: people, places

Whenever I visit the Washington DC area, I am amazed at how many bookstores there are - both new and used - and how good they are - within a 15-20 mile radius of downtown. To my surprise, considering what most of us think of politicos, it feels like a highly literate city. For example, in one of the malls there's a 4-floor Borders with shelves crammed full of books from way far down the back lists, not just best sellers, and one of the Barnes & Noble stores has two entire walls of books in foreign languages. Just fantastic. Some friends have retorted that I'm just reacting to something quirky and am wrong about DC in general. Well, what to my wondering eyes should appear America's Most Literate Cities study wherein one finds that DC is ranked third out of all U.S. cities with populations over a quarter of a million. So there!! In terms of simply the number of bookstores, DC is 10th so that means 9 cities ahead of it. San Francisco and Seattle, not surprisingly, are at the top. I think I'll take a driving tour of the higher nine, soon, given how rewarding a book trip to DC always proves to be. Incidentally, Denver is famous for awesome bookstores and comes in at 12th. Boston and NYC, home of highly literate intelligensia, make it at 30th and NYC respectively. Is this a great country, or what?

Labels: books

For about the two billionth time, I must pay hommage to one of my mother's favorite comments:

God writes straight with crooked lines.

She was always remarking on the fact that wonderful things can emerge from awful things, that kindness often emerges in the face of misery, that we learn and grow more from difficulty and pain than when things go well and without bumps in the road. So so true.

Labels: reflections

Sometimes it seems as if life is one long series of losing people one cares about. Today I learned that someone will be leaving my firm in three weeks. I've enjoyed many engaging conversations with her about quite a very wide variety of topics. Her new job is a wonderful opportunity for her, truly, but I am sad to see such a special person leave my orbit. It's wonderful to meet people and explore the world with them. It's also hard to see them go.

Labels: farewells, people

Happy former anniversary to me and the father of my fabulous children. We may not have been married very long but it certainly was a fortuitous union.

Labels: about me, family

Gotta get in touch with my Inner Santa. Have to buckle down and join the festivities. Actually, I managed to hang three wreaths on the front of my house yesterday - which was tricky especially on the third floor - and I have to admit they look charming. Wish I didn't worry about burning the house down, though. On a much safer note, I added a holiday-esque background here. Hope it doesn't bother anyone. Or me.

Labels: blogs (mine), holidays

Those three guys are obviously in great shape and very daring. The three who are missing on their climb of Mt. Hood in Oregon. And I think it's fabulous that we live in a country where we can do something really dangerous, get into trouble, and get rescued just because we're part of the American family. At least millions of examples take place every day. But how come these three are getting such super duper military equipment sent after them? So secret that the Army guy at the press conference this morning said he didn't have clearance to explain what it did, when a newsman asked. Do they work for the military, or do their parents? Think of the many taxpayer dollars and the hundreds of people who have risked their lives in this search. I don't begrudge them any of it, I just wonder whether it would be quite the same for all of us and, if not, who these folks really are. My fairness sensors are reacting, I guess.

Labels: reflections

Wow. I am Time Magazine's Person of the Year. And so are you. And you and you and you. My first reaction was to think it was silly. But I think they have a point. More than ever, each of us is individually potent and, together, we are important and powerful. Cool. Congratulations to us!

Labels: reflections

Officially correct nomenclature has changed sometime in the last thirty years. At least as far as how to write the names of married women. I realized this as I was reading the official guest list of attendees at the recent Kennedy Center honors. Wives were listed as "Mrs. + their own first name + their husband's last name". When I was in high school, we were taught the rules of correct naming formats (no, I don't know why that was part of our training) and learned that that format meant the woman was a widow. As I read the list this morning, being the alert person I am, I figured that these people were listed with luminaries who included their husbands so they were actually present at the festivities and therefore not widows. Since official guest lists are almost certainly written "correctly", it means things have changed. What a relief. I've never forgotten the rebuke I earned by writing minutes of a committee meeting with married women's names including their own first names. Yes, Virginia, progress is being made.

Labels: modern culture, reflections

Whew. One of my favorite bloggers is "back to work" with his writing. Spiced Sass is never predictible, always interesting, sometimes writing about culture and sometimes about science and sometimes about politics. This morning's piece on Scubert is a wonderful example of why I'm so glad he's there with something to say nearly ever day.

Labels: blogs (others'), music, reflections

Another thoughtful, thought-provoking column by Charles Krauthammer, a really must read.

Labels: reflections

Awesome: fantastic blogs have another member with the arrival of a fruitcake blog! It's enough to make me want to get one. I have several friends who are crazy about them - and some who loathe them. Not too many desserts arouse so many reactions. Anyway, the mission statement of Mondo Fruitcake is:

to review all the fruitcakes out there that seem to be giving fruitcake a bad name--as well as to find the fruitcakes that are actually good--swell, even. I've ranked all the fruitcakes I've reviewed so far and put links to those reviews in the sidebar.

And the links to the mail order places are there too. Ciao! Chow!

Labels: blogs (others'), food

I'm a huge fan of talk radio when I'm driving more than 15 or 20 minutes. I love arguing with them or cheering them on, whatever, but almost always like it better than scanning for something musical I want to listen to. I've never been crazy about iPods or paid radio stations because my taste changes from minute to minute when I'm driving and my tolerance is really really minimal. BUT. I don't know if it's me or if they've actually become more acerbic and ridiculous, but the talk radio hosts I've heard this week have been bonkers. It's almost as if they don't really think they have something juicy to harangue about, so they just raise their voices louder and yell louder but without anything useful to say. Anyone else having that reaction or is it me?

Labels: reflections

Apologies to anyone who cares about my absence the last couple of days. I was crazy busy at work, Thursday, and then spent Friday and most of today in wonderful fabulous child caring. I also finished the latest Robert Parker book with Spenser and Hawk (Hundred Dollar Baby) which is pretty good - not the best but a good addition to the nearly fifty-long list.

Labels: blogs (mine)

I had C-Span2 on while getting ready for work today. I like it sometimes because I can have it on and still cook, get dressed, tidy up, knit or whatever. Plus, it's like seeing original art instead of reprints in that they broadcast meetings and conferences which, if reported at all in print media or online, are usually summarized and not thoroughly. This morning's conference was about "minority thinking" in journalism. The word "minority" didn't mean non-white (refreshingly) but non-mainstream, so my interest was piqued. Participants from both mainstream and small outlets voiced varied and articulate viewpoints. The Eisenhower Foundation hosted, and may have an agenda of its own, but what I heard discussed was the idea that journalism schools won't increase minority percentages (either people of color or non-mainstream thinking) in practicing journalism simply by spending more money, because outlets (newspapers, television stations, electronic media, etc.) must take a larger share of the responsibility. It's true and vital - and I was excited to hear it stated so bluntly in a visible, large and socially-acceptable forum. On the other hand, one speaker referred to "real journalists, you know, not bloggers" which served to dampen the good points considerably, not to mention my optimism. What logic allows one to advocate non-mainsteam people and thought while championing elitism for training and production?

Labels: reflections

Which president is the subject of the following and who wrote it?

All his cabinet and all his military advisors . . . counseled a path [he] thought would lead to disaster. He was . . . judged by most of Washington -- including much of his cabinet -- to be a country bumpkin . . . out of his league, an accidental president.

Give up? Read this.

Labels: politics

There have been 1,382,561 candles lit online, to date, in the Bristol-Myers Squibb campaign. Fantastic!

Labels: anniversaries, modern culture

How the HECK does Kofi Annan have the gall to call American policy in Iraq hypocritical??! What kind of logic allows him to look at himself in the mirror and keep a straight face while sneering at anyone considering the highlights of his term as Secretary-General at the UN: horrors in Darfur (about which he has said and done nothing), massacres in the Balkans (about which he has said and done nothing), massacres in Rwanda (about which he has said and done almost nothing), the Oil-for-Food ridiculousness (with this son by his side) (about which he has said and done very little), etc., etc. And do not forget that the UN, also on Annan's watch, sanctioned Iraq quite thoroughly but then, under his 'leader'ship, turned on its collective heel when the US decided to put teeth into the sanctions. What a hypocritical, lying, smug man.

Labels: huh?, politics

Thanks to Dustbury, I've just heard something I never expected - a trumpet playing classical music. Just a quick listen to the mini-website version of Paganini's Caprice by Alison Balsom is enough to make me buy the cd - and you can listen by clicking on her name. My classical music purist aunt might have been appalled at the idea of transcribing the Caprice for trumpet, but I think it's cool and quite lovely. Besides, shouldn't we stretch our imaginations in as many ways as possible??

Labels: blogs (others'), music

Hmmm, today is John Kerry's and Tom Hayden's birthday. Shall we make anything of that? Should the populace have known that before considering electing Mr. Kerry?

Labels: anniversaries, politics

A peek at a section of the reversible scarf I'm making in a fabulous variegated Lorna's Lace yarn. I love the curvy edge because of doing cables on both outside edges every 22 rows (with a center cable in between). It's 2x2 ribbing, by the way, therefore it's identical on each side. And the yarn is yummy. This is a very nice time in the history of textiles. BTW, the pattern is a combination with slight alterations of the cinnabar scarf and the d-made cable scarf, the former found at Knitting Pattern Central which is a terrific resource for Lion Brand and other free patterns.

Labels: knitting

It's all the rage among school kids to sneeze into the crook of your arm instead of your hand. It's a funny gesture but it's very common-sense once you hear about it. Inky Circus's video may make you a convert if the logic does do it alone. Achoo!

Labels: modern culture

In a blunt way, Tony Blair, Prime Minister of Great Britain in case you've been under a rock, declared that immigrants have a "duty" to assimilate. Considering that Britain has a very large immigrant population and has been tip-toe-ing carefully around dealing with them, this is astronishing. In a long article, the U.K. Telegraph quoted him as saying that Muslims need to have "equality of respect" if they want to live in Britain, that they need to treat women better, that they need to adhere to the rule of law, and that they need to learn and use the English language. He added that if they they don't choose to do these things and are not prepared to conform to "the virtues of tolerance", they should stay away. He champions difference, cheers the celebrations of different cultures but only within the context of British society's "essential values", namely "belief in democracy, the rule of law, tolerance, equal treatment for all, respect for this country."

"Conform to it; or don't come here. We don't want the hate-mongers, whatever their race, religion or creed. . . . If you come here lawfully, we welcome you. If you are permitted to stay here permanently, you become an equal member of our community and become one of us. . . . The right to be different. The duty to integrate. That is what being British means."

Since Blair and Bush are such good friends and share ideologies, perhaps we can expect a similar statement from Bush soon.

Labels: reflections

It isn't hard to understand why the word "christmas" distresses some people. They're atheist or Muslim or Jewish or Buddhist or something else non-Christian and they don't want to celebrate or have to observe the birth of a religious figure whose organization they don't honor. No problem. But there's a bit of reality that's missing. This holiday began in then-mostly-Christian Europe to celebrate both the winter season and the birth of Jesus. The fact is that western societies began with a mostly Christian ethos. The fact is that shopkeepers take in more than half their annual income during this season. The fact is that many of us buy lots of things and give our friends and family lots of things that we hope they'll enjoy. And the fact is that we receive lots of things that our family and friends hope we will enjoy. The fuss is interesting and useful in terms of understanding that our culture has become significantly multi-cultural, but it also is disingenuous since we all enjoy and benefit from the whole thing. I can hardly wait til Spring - maybe we'll get to go through this all over again at Easter when we celebrate the resurrection of Christ (uh-oh) as well as the world emerging from the winter freeze.

Labels: holidays, reflections

Do you send holiday cards? I used to send hundreds - when I was a sweet young married thing - and then I send dozens - when I was a young single thing trying to make connections - and now I send nowhere more than fifty. I always felt as if I should write something personal on them and I always wanted unique or gorgeous or fabulously creative cards which meant putting way too much work into making them (once or twice) or time into finding them (all the rest). This year I'm feeling it might be fun to write one of those newsy cards (the ones I always like to receive and read even though I maintain that I don't like them). What do you send?

Labels: holidays, modern culture

Yahoo front page has a plug for knitting! Aside from talking about what a pleasant pasttime knitting is, the story links to some of the best sites, not just the usual suspects. I guess this proves lots of people are interested - as if the zillions of physical and online stores weren't a clue.

Labels: knitting

Last night, channel surfing, I happened upon the press conference that Blair and Bush held during the day. They were in slightly subdued but brisk form. I always love watching them parry and thrust with the inquisitioners journalists. One man asked a question that was really four questions and Bush said something along the lines of so how come you get four questions for one? and of course there was a slightly nervous chuckle in reaction, but he pleasantly answered all four, to his credit. I'd want to slap some of these guys silly, they're so rude, but neither George nor Tony ever loses it. At another point, a British correspondent asked Bush whether, in light of the ISG report, Bush would admit he's blown it in Iraq. After a slight pause, he leaned on the podium, looked directly at the guy, raised his eyebrows, and said, "It's bad over there." Then he paused again and asked, "okay? happy? is that what you wanted to hear?" (Of course the guy really wanted Bush to say he was a terrible horrible no good very bad man, but we all know that. Seriously, though, who wants presidents or prime ministers to go around saying they were wrong? Everyone makes better-or-worse decisions, but shouldn't leaders simply morph worse ones into different ones? They have fiendishly difficult decisions to make and frequently nothing "right" but only slightly less wrong to choose from. So how would flaggelation help?) Anyway, the press conference was interesting and fun. Much more than it's being reported. It was also an insight into their private discussions and shared motivations as when Bush said neither he nor Blair want historians to look back at this time and ask, "were Blair and Bush asleep?!"

Labels: reflections

Okay, only a few questions required much thought (do you remember how to find the area of a triangle?) but I always like getting 100% and it was fun!

Labels: fun, silliness

Very exciting moment, knitting tonight. I'm making a cable scarf and, as usual, was dreading coming to the end of the first skein because I loathe weaving ends in since they never disappear the way I want them to. So I decided to try the wet-splice method I've read about. First I made sure both ends were the same place in the variegated color sequence, then I unspun a couple of inches on both ends. Then I dampened the six pieces of each strand. Then I overlapped them and gently twisted. It looked pretty good but the test was in the knitting, done a bit gingerly. And it worked like a total charm. Yet another reason to be a wool purist, right?! It's a terrific technique and if you haven't tried it, you should.

Labels: knitting

It's evident that weather has been weird (lots of hurricanes (2005), almost no hurricanes (2006), warm months (November 2006), cool months (summer 2005), etc., etc). But bottom line is that it's not clear what's going on mostly because our perspective is a tad limited from the point of view of millenia which is the only perspective that would really prove anything, the earth being a living breathing fluctuating organism and all. I wish those newspapers in the attic from 8,000 years ago had held up better. So it's extraordinarily distasteful - repugnant, even - for some senators to try and quash research on the subject. There is no justification for such a request. Un-dictated knowledge is essential.

Labels: reflections

Last night was a repeat on The Unit so I almost didn't watch but it was an episode I hadn't seen and boyoboy was it startling in light of the recent death-by-plutonium of Russian putative spy, Litvinenko. For those unfamiliar with it, The Unit is written and produced by David Mamet and is in its second season. It shows the adventures of the members of a special forces unit as well as the day-to-day lives of their wives, kids, friends, etc., which is a nifty juxtaposition dramatically. Last night's plot had it that some people in Pakistan had infected themselves with a virulent form of smallpox, becoming bacteria-carrying suicide bombers who planned to join a tourist group - shake hands, make friends, sit at meals with the people on the tour and thereby spread the disease to the infidels. How like London it seemed, where Litvinenko supposedly just woke up one day with plutonium poisoning. (How could plutonium possibly just show up in a restaurant? Along the lines of, "Oh look, honey, a gnu just sat down at our table.") I won't spoil the episode because it's well worth seeing since it raised some fascinating ethical, tactical and is-it-happening-here? issues.

Labels: tv

Diane (whose blog is listed as Fall of the Empire but which I cannot find and hope she will enlighten me blogs are Diane's Stuff and Dead Guy on the Sidebar, both delightful places to visit) commented at my post about The Swimming Pool that she watches Court TV when knitting. Which made me think to ask what other people like to watch when they're knitting - or do you prefer knitting in silence and/or with music? I'll update it as people tell me their choices:

music, radio, movies (British comedies, British films, French films (no languages where I absolutely have to read subtitles, though), anything with a decent story line but not tooooo absorbing), current TV shows (e.g., The Unit, Criminal Minds, Numbers, NCIS, Shark, reruns of Becker and Sex in the City), Court TV, . . .

Labels: blogs (others'), france, knitting, things to do, tv

Maybe pieces of wool fluff interfered with transmissions to my brain, what with all the yarn passing by it, but I was quite unable to figure out what was going on in the first part of The Closer tonight (a show I always make time for - it's awesome). Knight Rider's car's voice, come to life as an un-retired operative, may not be entirely a good guy, but who did what and to whom and why, shot right by me. Anyone. . . ?

Labels: tv, whining

Random Shelf has a handy and very enthusiastic listing-with-reviews of TCM's holiday film offerings this month.

Labels: holidays, movies, reflections, s.p.e.e.d.ing, shopping

I also watched The Glory of My Father (La Gloire de mon pere) while knittingknittingknitting this weekend. Marcel Pagnol wrote it about a summer vacation at the turn of the last century when he and his family rented a house in Provence with his mother's sister and her husband. Part coming-of-age and part joy-of-family, the colors are vivid, the emotions are simple and clear, and it's all charming and gentle. Pagnol was married for thirty years to one Jacqueline Bouvier (evidently not "our" Jacqueline Bouvier although I must look into that) and he was the first filmmaker to be elected into the Academie Francaise, high prestige indeed, for having written Marius, Fanny, Manon des sources, Jean de Florette, and many others. Now I have to see some of those others and find out what the fuss is all about!

Labels: movies

Having failed to persuade myself to buy ties for everyone, I've been knitting all weekend, with occasional pauses to nibble something, have a cup of tea and read stuff online. One gets surprisingly antsy doing so much activity with only hands and arms. I also go absolutely mad during marathon knitting sessions unless I watch tv or a movie. The fare on cable is pretty bad unless one likes sports or infomercials or reruns of movies that, while terrific, were broadcast last week or yesterday. Which brings me to a DVD of The Swimming Pool, a French and British collaboration written and directed by Francois Ozon and starring the still eye-catching Charlotte Rampling. With Charles Dance and Ludivine Sagnier in it, too, the watching is wonderful. It may or may not be a murder mystery but it's definitely about a murder mystery writer who is also a woman feeling scorned and abandoned. There's a great big twist which one almost certainly overlooks or, at least, forgets, until the credits roll and you think a minute and then you go "aha!". Bottom line is that it's a heckuva lot of fun and I highly recommend it. The scenery (the south of France in early Fall) is to die for (no pun intended) and makes you want to buy a ticket right now and go there tomorrow. The characters are somewhat focused on sex (hey, it's a French movie) and the only warning I'd issue is that if you don't like to see parts of bodies you dont' usually see front and center onscreen, you won't like it. As for plot, someone may or may not have been murdered and someone or several someones may or may not have murdered the dead or alive person and, furthermore, may or may not be who he or she seems to be. By the way, some reviews seem not to have gotten the point so if you read a reivew that sounds as if they saw a difficult, weird and ponderous movie, don't believe them and don't even finish the review. The Swimming Pool isn't weird or difficult at all - and you don't want to miss it. It's an absolutely terrific and fun film. And if anyone wants to talk about it in comments, I'd be glad to.

Labels: france, movies, writing

Several blogs and news outlets are chattering about Gwyneth Paltrow's recent comments about enjoying dinner conversations in Britain. I wasn't going to weigh in but really have to. I'm a huge fan of dinner table conversation. In fact, the only thing I like better than good conversation while eating a good dinner is reading a good book while eating a good dinner. One of my all-time favorite films is Louis Malle's My Dinner with Andre (I wonder if Paltrow knows it?!). Some reactions have it that Paltrow prefers dinner in Britain because of political agreement there and disagreement here. But I don't think that has to be the case, having read her remarks and having lived there for a few months a few different times. My experience was that almost all Brits will discuss books and plays and even philosophical ideas willingly and with interest. Their willingness to express intellectual curiosity doesn't seem to depend on education or profession as much as it does here. Remember I'm only speaking from personal experience, but clearly many Americans know and read more than enough to have the same discussions and yet few do so except one-on-one. There's a cultural aversion in this country to being thought a "geek", as demonstrated in literature and movies such as "Brilliant Mind" where smart people are always a bit "off". Sometimes I try to do my part but with little success. You should have heard the fuss it caused at a recent dinner when I mentioned Xeno's paradox as an example of thought construction versus practical fact.

Labels: huh?

Continuing a week-us horribilus for Columbia University, The New York Daily News reported yesterday that some Columbia University journalism students have been caught cheating in an ethics class. Honor-system-like, the exam can be taken in any 90-minute period over 36 hours presumably because it's a grad school class and many schedules of many students to take into account. The onomatapeicness of cheating in an ethics class is rather delightful and altogether impossible to resist. But in times when we're trying to understand and make room for all points of view and value systems, some questions arise. The ever-perceptive Spunky sets it up:

if I asked you to tell me how long a line was, you would tell me your answer, then I would tell you mine. Then we would get a ruler and measure to see who was correct. That's an independent standard. We recognize and accept that a ruler is the standard to measure length. Without a ruler we would have no way of determining the length of a line.

Which is fine for factual things. But then comes a sixty-four million dollar question: in a morally relative world, why is it wrong to cheat on a test? To which those of us who are not religious reply "because some things are wrong and some things are right." But how to know what's right and what's wrong, not to mention why they're right and wrong, not to mention prove it?

Labels: reflections

Christmas shopping. Ugh. I hate that we're supposed to spend a gajillion dollars because, somehow, that proves that we love our friends and family a lot. I wish the challenge was to spend as little as possible on no more than two presents per person, selected just right to match an interest of theirs or that we want to share with them. I always have grand plans for things to make people and then comes this time of year and I've lost all that time going to work and sleeping and stuff. So this weekend I must major headway on the gifts that might actually get done and knitknitknitknitknitknit. Unless I could convince myself to buy everyone a tie?

Labels: holidays, shopping

I was going to resist writing about this but as I commented on Seablogger's post about Peggy Noonan's piece on an exchange between Senator Webb and President Bush, I realized I wanted to put my thoughts here. For those who don't know about it, there are two important pieces of background you need to know. One is that Webb's son is a Marine, stationed in Iraq. The other is that Webb was a Republican but so incensed by the war in Iraq that he switched parties and ran as a Democrat this year and won his Virginia election. With all that in mind, what happened last week at a White House Christmas reception is getting lots of attention. As GWB moved among the people there, Webb indicated he didn't want to be photographed with the president. He didn't make a big deal of it, at least as far as it's reported, but later on, GWB went to Webb and asked, "How is your son?" According to The Washington Post, Webb answered that he wants his son back from Iraq. To which GWB replied, "That's not what I asked you. I asked how's your son?" To which Webb reportedly replied that was between him and his son.

Must have been an amazing moment but the brouhaha is between those who think Webb was unnecessarily rude and those who think GWB put himself foolishly in line to be attacked. My own opinion is that I think they both knew exactly what they were doing and it wasn't that big a deal to either one of them. However, I think there are several very human pieces to this story. For one thing, the army is entirely volunteer, so Webb's son chose to enlist. He may have had his father's support or, more likely, his father may have argued with him and lost. Imagine how Webb feels either way - if he supported the decision and now his son is in Iraq, or if he opposed it and every day has to wait and see knowing it was his son's choice. Difficult and miserable situation and any parent would sympathize. Meanwhile, Bush had to know about Webb switch and election because it was a huge and decisive deal in the Senate power balance. So I think he knew what he was getting into when he went to talk to Webb and obviously Webb knew he might run into Bush and that Bush might speak to him.

What crafty nasty motive would be behind asking after Webb's son? Suppose Bush is indeed a jerk and really meant "nya, nya, your son's in danger because of my decisions, so I hope you have a really unhappy holiday." That seems really dumb because at least someone would make note of it and reported it and what would he have gained besides two minutes of bad-tempered amusement. Plus, by all accounts, Bush isn't bad-tempered or mean but a nice guy personally, so his question almost certainly was simply meant to express concern.

Finally, when you consider what Webb could have said and/or done as an answer, his response was fairly restrained. I'd bet Bush expected at least that, if not something worse. And since he's not the emotionally delicate creature that his predecessor was (thank goodness), I'd also bet he was partly curious to see what Webb would say but wanted, more, to express his concern. (And by the way, does anyone report what Bush answered at the end, or did his handlers whisk him away?)

Labels: huh?

This is not my usual kind of thing but to observe World Aids Day today (December 1st), Bristol-Myers is donating one dollar to AIDS research every time someone their website and lights a candle on their website. It's a pretty cool interactive gimmick, for one thing, and if, somehow, the few seconds it takes to visit the site and light a candle really makes a difference, then hallelujia and let's all do it! All the millions of bloggers could actually make people physically better (on top of improving them emotionally and personally just because they blog, of course). Anyway, the site is lighttounite.org (you may have to 'refresh' or retype the url but try clicking first). And please please forward this to your friends and anyone else. Just a few seconds raises a dollar - how cool is that? (290,508 449,760 so far!)

Labels: reflections, s.p.e.e.d.ing