48/365 - Kindle

In May, it will be two years since I bought my Kindle, and I've never looked back.  I love that thing, and there's no question I read more now because of it.  (And to think-- for a long time I was one of those who almost resented the idea of an e-reader!)

52 Weeks of Happy (7/52)

Four Things That Made Me Happy This Week:


1.  Reading.
I'm going at a snail's pace through my current book, since I generally only read while exercising, these days, and, um, I haven't been as consistent about that as I ought, but Tish is growing on me.  The book Donald and I are reading, Feet of Clay, has been amusing, too.  There's nothing like slipping into another world for half an hour or so-- especially when it's a well-ordered world with the kind of author you can trust to supply a satisfying conclusion with all the threads of the story tied into a nice, neat bow.  Yes, please, and thank you kindly!


2.  A new crochet project in new colors.
This one will be a variety of different 12" blocks.  There's no chance to get bored when you crochet each pattern only once!  It keeps you on your toes.  (I know; I mention crochet a lot in these "what made me happy" entries-- but it's one of the things that most consistently make me happy, lately...)


3.  Homemade sugar cookies. 
I don't make them very often-- once or twice a year, maybe-- and that's probably definitely a good thing, because they never last long.  I end up eating (much) more than my share of them.  So while it made me happy to have a batch of them to enjoy, this week, I'm also happy that-- as of this afternoon-- they're gone.  No more guilty craving for one more cookie.  ;o)


4.  Favorite TV shows.
(For instance, Community, which finally returned with new episodes a week or so ago.)   It sounds kind of shallow, somehow, which is silly.  Why is feeling happy about a TV show so different from feeling happy about books?  Turning on the TV and relaxing on the couch (with a crochet project in hand) at the end of the day is a real treat.  Nothin' wrong with a little escapism... (Or a whole heapin' lot of it, as the case may be, what with books and TV and so on and so forth.)


BONUS.  Not getting hit by a meteorite.
Can something that didn't happen count? (g)  Sure, why not?  I'm thankful and very happy that the world is still turning in its usual way, with no cataclysmic calamities to complain of.  Seriously, though, these "little things" have a wonderful way of making you stop and take stock of your life.  There are major problems in the world, but it could be so much worse. 


Hm.  I think at least certain elements of these "52 Weeks" entries are beginning to sound like a broken record.  (Crafts, food, weather, gardening, books.)  I guess the same small things make me happy on a regular basis... Or maybe I'm just not good at remembering the other things.  I'll keep up with 52 Weeks, though.  It can't hurt, and we're only seven weeks into the project.

11/365 - Beyond the Square Crochet Motifs

Today I discovered two "book review" posts I'd written (but neglected to publish) for my crochet/knitting/sewing blog.  I snapped a few photos to illustrate my points.  Started in 2011, finished in 2013.  What a pace!

Ha!

(You have to know something about the authors and/or works mentioned to get the "joke", but at least I think it's funny...)

While googling for book/author recommendations for fans of P.G. Wodehouse, I came across a library website suggesting that if you like P.G. Wodehouse and Charles Dickens, you should try Ethan Frome, by Edith Wharton.  Ok, maybe for someone who enjoys the darker side of Dickens, Edith Wharton could make a little sense, but P.G. Wodehouse?  And Ethan Frome?  Surely this "Ellen" (the librarian making the recommendations) jests.

The other recommendations for fans of Wodehouse and Dickens were just as odd:  A Changed Man (apparently about a reformed skinhead), About a Boy (it's by Nick Hornby, so I'm assuming it's drama), March (which evidently "drives home the intimate horrors and ironies of the Civil War and the difficulty of living honestly with the knowledge of human suffering"), and War Trash ("painted with starkly melancholy longing").

This is just weird.  Or did Wodehouse (of Jeeves and Wooster fame) also pen works of starkly melancholy longing about the intimate horrors and ironies of war and human suffering?  Possibly I've simply never happened to hear of them...

Random Stuff

And I mean random.

- - - - - - -

Via Twitter--

Valerie Jarrett: Obama 'getting absolutely no sleep' because of debt crisis.

Oh, no!
*wipes away a tear*
 

This whole situation is infuriating.
...I'll leave it at that.

- - - - - - -

Donald dislikes "Primetime: What Would You Do?"

Haven't seen it?  Here's the description for tonight's episode:

Scenarios (suggested by viewers) include a little person being mocked for his size; a teenager telling her boyfriend that she's pregnant and wants the baby--to his loudly expressed disapproval; a child disapproving loudly upon hearing his dad is gay; a young woman in a wheelchair being offered help in public when she doesn't need it; and a boy being harassed by others boys because he has red hair.

Ick.  This show gives me the shudders.  Why didn't they bring back Candid Camera, instead?

Programs on Michael's "Change the Channel QUICK" List:

• "Extreme Makeover:  Home Edition"  
• It was ok in the earliest episodes, but then it degenerated into every single week being about people with the most depressing stories they can find, tears being a must, and the designers going crazy and doing weird, over-the-top things every episode.  I'm glad if people in bad (beyond their control) situations basically win the lottery and get a free home makeover, but... I don't want to watch it happen over an emotional hour of TV.  I just don't like it.
• "The Doctors" and "Dr. Oz"
• Medical stuff?  And in a "talk show" format?  No, thank you. Not now, not ever.  This is pretty much how I feel about most "talk shows", but the medical aspect makes me hit the "next channel" button with record-breaking speed.  (I may have mentioned before-- in passing-- that I run screaming from serious medical/health-related stuff?  I was telling the truth. Fiction, non-fiction, fan fiction-- doesn't matter.  I don't like it.  I can barely fathom that there are enough people out there who do like it that programs like these stay on the air...)

- - - - - - -

When I pulled aside the curtain on our kitchen door this morning (preparing to open it to let Trixie out for her morning stroll), there were two deer standing right outside our gate!  That's probably the closest I've ever been to a wild deer.  I was so surprised I didn't notice if they were does, bucks, whatever.  (I tend to think neither of them had antlers, though.)

- - - - - - -

Sometime in the past month or two, Donald spotted a young armadillo rooting around in our side yard (outside the fence).  We got some photos and videos of it.  Maybe I'll get around to editing and uploading some of the video soon...  (What a treat for you all! ;o))

- - - - - - -

Someone ought to make a satire of The Rainbow Fish in which the rainbow-scaled fish is replaced by a fluffy-haired dog.  The other (short-haired) neighborhood dogs are jealous of Fluffy Dog's luxuriously long, silky fur and begin demanding that she share patches of it.  Fluffy Dog is guilted into giving away all her fur (after some exceptionally bad advice from a mysterious alley cat), and in the end, every dog in the 'hood has a patch of her fluffy fur.  Fluffy Dog herself now looks something like this:

...Only uglier.

The story continues for a page or two more to say that since the other dogs only liked (Formerly-)Fluffy Dog when and because she gave them her beautiful fur, their friendship is shallow and short-lived.  Soon, they're off pestering the new pup on the block (a poofy poodle) for a lock of his curly hair.  Fluffy Dog, realizing that she has given away her natural-born gifts for nothing-- to a group who don't even truly value them-- is left sad and alone.  Until her fur grows back in, that is.  Then the others will be back for more, because it isn't right that she should have something they don't have.

The End.  ;o)
(Maybe it's already been done?)

- - - - - - -

There are people actually looking forward to this new movie about golf.
I am baffled.

Of course, I am also fully aware of the fact that there are plenty of people who'd be baffled by the things I look forward to, so...

(That Cowboys & Aliens thing looks interesting, for example.)

- - - - - - -

Musical obsession of the moment-- Patrick O'Hearn's "Beyond This Moment":

Rainbow Fish

I guess this Rainbow Fish storybook came along after I was out of elementary school, so no well-meaning teacher never read it aloud to my class.  Having heard it mentioned a few times over the years, today I finally took a minute to look it up.

Get ready to roll you eyes, if you must, but I have to agree that it is somewhat troubling.

Most of all, however, it's boring.  It seems that the people who remember loving the book as children mostly just liked looking at the glittery/shiny scales in the illustrations.  The story itself is a real snoozer.

Then there's the "moral" that in order to be accepted by others, you have to sacrifice whatever it is that makes you unique.  If you possess something that others desire, you really ought to give it to them.  Otherwise, you're just a big old meanie and no-one will ever want to play with you.  (Another moral:  You shouldn't hesitate to ask for whatever you want, even if it happens to belong to someone else.  Heck! Why should they have it, if you don't?  But maybe I'm overly sensitive on that point; I've always found that kind of thing particularly annoying...)

As for it being A Child's Garden of Socialism... Yes, I can see why some shudder at it, but I can also see why others roll their eyes.  Basically... I wouldn't read it to my own theoretical children.  For one thing, there are just way too many better stories available.  For another, I wouldn't want to teach young, impressionable minds that individuality (and individual property) must be modified (or divided) to fit the mold (or make things "fair").

Sure, you want kids to learn about sharing, but there are limits to how much anyone should be expected to share.  Would people view this story differently if Rainbow Fish hadn't been quite so rude to the little fish when it first asked for a scale?  Let's say Rainbow Fish had answered in a more neutral voice, "I'm sorry, but no.  If I give one to you, everyone else will want one, too, until there are none left at all.  Besides, your own blue scales are very pretty just as they are!" (And from that point, it turns into a story about knowing and valuing your own special qualities.)  Would that have been acceptable?  Would Rainbow Fish still have been expected to pull its own scales out (which, ew, by the way) and hand them out to the other bratty fish? (Well, they did shun Rainbow Fish whey he/she/it didn't want to part with his/her/its scales, and that wasn't very nice, either, was it?)

Ugh! ...This story is just depressing.  And annoying.
(Which seem to be the only types of things I ever blog about anymore.  Sorry.)

Mysterious

Since getting the Kindle, I've been spending more time looking around at books online, and I have to say, I'm amazed by the number of "niche" mystery series there are available today.  There's something for everyone, no matter what your hobby or interest (assuming you like cozy mysteries, which I do).  I already knew there were series about cats, knitters, and crocheters, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised by the number of other niches... but I am.

Here are some of the niche cozy-mystery series themes I've seen so far:

• Knitting or Crocheting (as stated)
• Salons/Stylists
• Candy store
• Food/Restaurants in general
• Cheese shop
• Wine country
• Travel agent
• Pet-sitter
• Crafts (soap-making and so on)
• High fashion
• Vintage clothing shop
• Card-making (another craft)
• Quilting

(And I'm sure there are more.)

It reminds me of Barbie dolls.  There's one for (nearly) every career or interest!

Personally, I think the card-maker mysteries seem the strangest of the bunch.  I'm not sure why... It just feels so completely random.

Things I Like About the Kindle

There are a few obvious things that you know you'll like about an e-reader, before you even hold it in your hands. 

There's the amazing portability of enough reading material to keep you busy for years (unless you read a lot more and a lot faster than I do).  You can carry a whole little library around with you (in this device that weighs less than some paperbacks!).  

Then there's the to ability to load something new from Amazon in seconds, when connected to a WiFi network.  (There's also a certain degree of ability to access other parts of the Internet, though it's definitely not what the WiFi Kindle was designed for-- and it shows.)  So far, I much prefer to shop on my regular computer than on the Kindle itself, but it's nice to know that I can get new reading material while on the go (as long as I can find a hotspot).

I knew that I would love all the easy access to free books.   (Technically, most of them have been free for years on-line, but I don't like reading off a computer screen for hours at a time.  Reading from the Kindle screen is nothing like reading from the computer monitor.  It's easier on your eyes, more portable, and more intimate, somehow, if you that makes any sense. (g)) There are many wonderful works in the public domain, and occasionally you'll find a more recent title available for free (as a promotion).  Some people complain about the lack of a live table of contents in some of the free classics, but personally, I tend not to skip from chapter to chapter very much, anyway.  Either I read from start to finish or I go directly to a favorite part (which is fairly easily estimated and jumped to, if you've read it enough to have a favorite part).  Of course, you can often get a version with the live table of contents for just a dollar or two, if it's important to you.  Most of the time, I think I'll be happy saving that dollar or two for something else.

So, those are some of the things I knew I'd like, but while using it these past few days, I've also already found myself appreciating a few other features that I hadn't really thought as much about before purchasing it...

First, no-hands reading.

This may be less of an issue if you typically read hardcovers (particularly those that are well-loved/beaten into submission), but often I find that when reading a book, I must keep at least one hand on it at all times, to hold it open to the right page.  If I want to eat while I read or just not have to hold the book open constantly, I must find something heavy enough to weigh down both sides of the book.  It can be difficult to position the makeshift weights so that they don't either slide off or block the text.

With the Kindle, of course, this is not an issue.  It's so lightweight that holding it up for hours is less likely to become tiring, but if you like (and I find that I often do), you can just set it down in front of you (or prop it up on something, to get a comfortable angle).  There are no pages trying to snap back shut.  You still have to press the button to the page, but until they figure out a way to let you control the e-reader with your mind, I guess we're stuck with that.  ;o) 

Second, dictionary look-up.

When I was young and full of aspirations-- when time seemed to stretch ahead of me in years long and many ;o)-- I was more likely to stop and look up an unfamiliar word when I came across one in a book.  These days, of course, that happens somewhat less often (thank goodness), but when it does, but I find myself less and less likely to bother looking it up.  I rely on context clues.  Educated guesses.  Call it laziness, if you will (though that's awfully judgmental of you, don't you think?).  In any case, I rarely bother to stop reading and flip through a dictionary (or run to the computer).  That's where the Kindle comes in, with its fancy built-in dictionaries and look-up system. 

I have to say, I'm impressed.  I've tried out the Kindle's default dictionary a few times already and found it very useful.  You just move the cursor to the front of the word you want defined, and up pops the definition.  Hit another button if you want to read more about it in the dictionary, and go back to your book with another single tap, when you're done.  It's so quick and painless, I think I'll be looking up unfamiliar words more often than ever!

Third, status bar (and "status dots").

When reading a non-digital book, I like to be able to tell at a glance approximately how much I've read.  It's just a useful thing to know, and it can be motivation to keep reading or save the last few pages, depending on your mood.  I hadn't really thought about the fact that when reading a digital copy of a book, you might not be able to gauge the length of a book so easily.

Fortunately, whoever designed the Kindle did consider that.  There are no page numbers on a Kindle, but at the bottom of every "page" (screen?), there's a thin, unobtrusive progress bar indicating how far you've read in that particular book-- and the numerical percentage of the book you've read (40%, for instance).  Another neat little feature is a tiny inverted triangle that marks where you were when you started reading in this particular "sitting". 

Something I think I'm less likely to use, but which is also potentially nice to know about is a row of "status dots" below each title in the Kindle's "table of contents"/home screen.  Under each title, there are a row of dots.  You can tell two things from these dots.  First, the length of the row varies in relation to the length of the work.  (I'm not sure how it's calculated, but you can tell at a glance whether it's a short story or a lengthy novel.)  Second, the dots become emboldened to indicate how far you have read in the work (which is how it works as a status bar). 

In closing, I still like it. (g)

(Incidentally, I opted for the slightly cheaper "Kindle with special offers", and in my opinion, the ads and offers are completely unobtrusive.  They only show on the screen-saver and in a thin band at the bottom of the "home" screen-- never when you're actually in the middle of reading something.  I find them very easy to ignore-- if anything, kind of interesting to look at-- but then again, I'm not easily bothered by non-noisy and non-pop-up ads, in general.)

...Well, enough rambling about that for now, I guess.  :o)

E-Reader Convert?

Whatever could it be?

(Ha. As if I haven't been stalking the USPS delivery status page for the past few days...)

Yay! It's my Kindle!

For a long time (well, as long as they've been around), I wasn't sure how I'd feel about an e-reader. I certainly wasn't sure enough that I'd like one to put (what I considered to be) a lot of money into buying one. But then the prices went down some... and I had a small gift card to use (thanks to Amazon Associates)... so I finally gave in...

And I think it's love at first sight.

I can already tell that I'm going to do a lot more reading because of this little gadget.

It's pretty neat.

...Now I'm off to do some reading. :o)

What You Missed

Let's see... What fascinating things have we been up to, lately?

Patio--
Donald put up a partial wall of lattice on the east- (and easement-) facing side of our enclosed, covered patio, and we decided to use more railing to finish the adjacent portion of the north-facing side.  (We originally planned to make that portion a partial wall of lattice, too, but after we were further along in the process, we changed our minds.)

I need to do a little touch-up painting, but I think that the patio is pretty much done, now.  We've started paving (with stepping stones) the little path from the patio to the gate for our next outdoor project.


Library Book Sale--
A few weekends ago, a neighboring county's library system had their annual book sale.  It's become a tradition for us to go (for the past few years, at least), and Kimberly usually comes along with us.  All three of us found some books we had to have.  Donald found loads of P.G.Wodehouse paperbacks (among other things), while I found that almost everything I selected fits into the mystery genre.  At fifty cents for paperbacks and a dollar for hardcovers, you can feel like you're splurging without actually spending that much at all.


Big Lagoon & Tarkiln Bayou--
Last week, Donald had to drive further than usual to meet with a client, and because it was just around the corner from a couple of state parks we've enjoyed visiting before, I came along and he took off the rest of the day so we could to take advantage of the proximity.

We hiked hither and thither.  We stopped for a yummy fast food lunch in between parks.  We saw pitcher plants, a squirrel building a nest, sparkling blue water, mysterious black water, sugar-white sand, marsh grass, cattails, ferns, dragonflies, lots of anoles and skinks, a jumping fish, birds of prey, and a moccasin (in the shallow water below the little nature trail bridge).  (ETA:  Donald reminded me that he spotted a large, bright green frog-- not far from the moccasin-- and that reminded me that we also saw a largish turtle out for a swim.  The turtle's already made an appearance over on our Flickr photostream, for all you turtle-lovers out there. ;o))

I was dumb and didn't think I needed to bring sunscreen, so I ended up with a slight sunburn on my forehead and cheeks.  Next time I'll bring the sunscreen.  (Donald was spared because he wore a hat.) 

We took photos, but I haven't felt like editing and uploading many of them, yet.  We'll see whether I ever do.  I don't think many of them turned out that great, and I've already posted photos of those places, after a previous visit, so...


Fireflies--
We've been seeing lightning bugs here in the early evenings.  We've had the best luck seeing them before it gets too completely dark... or late.   There's something magical about fireflies-- watching those twinkling lights against the dark trees and seeing a small, brief spark drifting just ahead of you... Less magical is the annoying whine of a mosquito right next to your ear as you try to enjoy the moment.  ("Ring the dinner bell, gals!  Soup's on!")

...And some other stuff I can't really remember at the moment.  Oh, Easter, for one, I guess.  (We had an "immediate family" Easter at my parents' house.)  Also, we got some plastic card covers/protectors for some of our newer games.  (That's very interesting.  You'd never have forgiven me if I'd forgotten to mention that.)  Have we earned board game geek status, yet? ;o)

...And I guess we'll call this finished.  (You can only take so much excitement in one day.)

Monday Random Stuff

Thoughts and "I/we did"s...

♣  It's funny how you can't help but notice which card games were popular during certain periods of history, based on how frequently they were mentioned in contemporary literature.  Whist is always popping up in Austen, for example-- and in books set "between the wars", bridge seems to be the game of choice.  In at least one of the E.F. Benson Lucia novels, all the characters are obsessed with it, and now I've just finished Agatha Christie's Cards of the Table, in which bridge plays an even more important role in the story.  I don't guess I have any interesting commentary on this subject, though.  It's just amusing to notice. 

♣  The most recent (only?) TV adaptation of Cards on the Table is awful.  I mean, I'm really fond of David Suchet as Poirot, so as far as that goes, I was happy, but did the writers have to change so much of the story?  Nearly every aspect of the novel was distorted, often beyond recognition.  This is the second time I've seen an adaption of an Agatha Christie that I'd actually read.  That one was also altered significantly... and horribly.  (Interestingly, both of these adaptations saw fit to inject homosexual themes where they didn't exist in the novels.  I guess the writers thought that would make a juicier story for modern audiences.  ...?)  The downside:  It's disappointing that it may be difficult to find a faithful adaptation when I want one.  The upside:  Maybe this means I can read all those Poirot novels I've watched adaptations of and still find the plot virtually unspoiled.  (g)  (My remarkable ability to forget things also helps in this respect.)

The main reason I don't understand major rewrites in adaptations (particularly in these Agatha Christie mysteries, where the plot is pretty much everything) is this:  You have a carefully plotted story all ready to go.  It's been proven successful!  Yay!  All you need to do is figure out how to transfer it to the screen.  But no.  You decide to change how characters behave-- their relationships to one another-- the motive of the murderer-- maybe even the murderer's identity.  But why?  Your audience can be divided into two groups-- those who have read the novel and those who have not.  For those who have not read the novel, the original plot will be entirely new.  (See?  No need to change a blessed thing!)  And those who have read the novel, yet still decide to watch an adaptation must've liked the original plot, right?  I mean, if they hated it, why would they bother watching it on TV?  It makes no SENSE. 

♣  Sometime within the past few weeks, we (mostly Donald) put up a ceiling fan in the breakfast room.  Last summer, we decided it would be a good place for one-- so now we're all set! 

♣  I spent a portion of the morning cleaning out and reorganizing our pantry-- with the result that it is probably the most organized "room" in the house, now.  (Probably ought to do something about that...)


♣  I sewed a washable pad for my Swiffer Wet Jet from a piece of an old towel and a couple snippets of elastic.  It seemed to work pretty well (cleaned the floor, stayed put on the Swiffer during cleaning), so now I'm interested to see how it holds up in the washing machine.  If the elastic doesn't work out, I may try velcro... but I have a feeling elastic is much cheaper (even if I have to replace it every so often.) ...Or I may try making one side of the pads out of some fabrics that tend to cling to the velco on their own...
 

I Just Don't GET IT

Five Random Things I've Never Really "Gotten":


#1:  "NKOTB" and "boy bands" in general
That's just not my style of music. Besides, I thought the NKOTB guys were gross (and wasn't shy about saying so, I'm afraid).  New Kids on the Block were big when I was in about the 5th and 6th grades.  I was one of (I think) only two girls in our class who didn't swoon over them.  (You'd be surprised how big a deal that sort of thing can be for girls at that age.  It certainly played a role in who I spent time with and how I related to my female classmates for years to come.)  I still haven't completely forgiven NKOTB for existing. ;o)


#2:  Waxing
Nope, just not worth it-- not by a long shot.  Give me a good old-fashioned razor instead.  (Maybe this is TMI.  Oh well.)  Many women say something silly like, "This is the price we pay for beauty.  Bring it on!" (followed by the sound of hair being ripped from follicles-- and a stifled scream)... to which I reply, "I'm beautiful enough as I am, thanks all the same."  (Well, as beautiful as I'm going to get, waxing or no waxing.) 


#3:  Sunbathing / Tanning Beds
I probably have my mother to thank for this.  (And no, I'm not being sarcastic.  Seriously, thanks, Mom.)  She taught us young that cigarettes and sunbathing (among other things) were Bad For You.  We used sunscreen at the beach-- so on and so forth.  Result: I've never been tempted in the least to sunbathe or use a tanning bed.

(Some might argue that this isn't much of a feat, since my natural skin tone isn't that light.  Maybe... But I never understood why people thought being pale was a bad thing.  In fact, I've sometimes felt that those who hold out milky arms and legs, bemoaning their lack of a tan, might actually be fishing for compliments on their perfectly creamy complexions.  *shrug*)


#4:  SPAM & Pop-Ups
No, I don't love the edible SPAM, either, but what I really meant was computer SPAM-- and those incredibly annoying pop-up ads that some sites still persist in having.  I know in theory that the reason they exist is that someone, somewhere is clicking and buying the junk in the ads, but I just don't get WHY anyone would do so.  WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE??


#5:  Disease/Death-Centric Novels
You know the ones I mean?  Novels in which the main character or his/her love interest (or his/her family member or close friend) has a very limited life expectancy-- and that's the whole point of the book, apparently.  For examples, look at practically anything Lurlene McDaniel has ever written.  With titles like Mother, Please Don't Die...  Don't Die, My Love...  If I Should Die Before I Wake...  She Died Too Young...  Sixteen and Dying...  and Why Did She Have to Die, how can you go wrong?

I recognize that there may be a need for this type of book... When an adolescent has to deal with serious disease or death in her own life, she may benefit from reading about similar situations and how characters deal with them.  One could even argue that reading such books gives those as yet untouched by tragedy a better sense of what her friends may go through.  ...But the thing is, most of the teen/pre-teen girls I knew who read those types of titles didn't seem to be doing it for therapeutic reasons or to gain greater empathy.  They just liked the melodrama.  I, on the other hand, did not.  Nor do I now.  This is one of the reasons I don't watch medical dramas-- and if I start reading a book, only to discover that it's going to focus on something so utterly depressing, my first instinct is to get rid of the horrible thing ASAP.

(One exception:  The Blue Castle, by L.M. Montgomery.  But that one doesn't really count, for reasons I can't go into without spoiling the whole book.)

Three Men on the Bummel

The latest book Donald and I read together-- Three Men on the Bummel, by Jerome K. Jerome-- wasn't quite as good as his Three Men in a Boat (To Say Nothing of the Dog), but still offered plenty of opportunities to laugh.

In Three Men on the Bummel, three middle-aged (youngish middle-aged, maybe?) British men of circa 1900 go on a "bummel" ("a journey, long or short, without an end; the only thing regulating it being the necessity of getting back within a given time to the point from which one started") through parts of Germany.  Hilarity ensues (though, again, not quite as much hilarity as ensues when the same three men, in younger years, go on a boating holiday down the Thames in Three Men in a Boat).

Well, as we read the last chapter, we kept stopping to shake our heads.  Looking back through the prism of history (as they say (g)), it's amazing how right-on-the-dot Jerome K. Jerome was in at least some of his estimations of Germany and the German psyche at that time.  (Remember, this was published in 1900.)

Donald pointed out that in many instances (not all) in that final chapter, you can substitute "liberal" for "German" (and then toward the end, "conservative" for "Anglo-Saxon") and have a fairly accurate portrayal of some aspects of the character of the modern liberal democrat.

He selected some excerpts that he thought especially telling:

In the placid, docile German of to-day, whose only ambition appears to be to pay his taxes, and do what he is told to do by those whom it has pleased Providence to place in authority over him, it is difficult, one must confess, to detect any trace of his wild ancestor, to whom individual liberty was as the breath of his nostrils […]

In Germany to-day one hears a good deal concerning Socialism, but it is a Socialism that would only be despotism under another name.  Individualism makes no appeal to the German voter.  He is willing, nay, anxious, to be controlled and regulated in all things. […]

The German citizen is a soldier, and the policeman is his officer.  The policeman directs him where in the street to walk, and how fast to walk.  At the end of each bridge stands a policeman to tell the German how to cross it.  Were there no policeman there, he would probably sit down and wait till the river had passed by. […]

In Germany you take no responsibility upon yourself whatever.  Everything is done for you, and done well.  You are not supposed to look after yourself; you are not blamed for being incapable of looking after yourself; it is the duty of the German policeman to look after you. […]

If you lose yourself, he finds you; and if you lose anything belonging to you, he recovers it for you.  If you don’t know what you want, he tells you.  If you want anything that is good for you to have, he gets it for you.[…]

“You get yourself born,” says the German Government to the German citizen, “we do the rest.  Indoors and out of doors, in sickness and in health, in pleasure and in work, we will tell you what to do, and we will see to it that you do it.  Don’t you worry yourself about anything.”[…]

Carlyle said of the Prussians, and it is true of the whole German nation, that one of their chief virtues was their power of being drilled.  Of the Germans you might say they are a people who will go anywhere, and do anything, they are told.  […]

For the direction of German character into these channels, the schools, of course, are chiefly responsible.  Their everlasting teaching is duty.  It is a fine ideal for any people; but before buckling to it, one would wish to have a clear understanding as to what this “duty” is.  The German idea of it would appear to be: “blind obedience to everything in buttons.” […]

Hitherto, the German has had the blessed fortune to be exceptionally well governed; if this continue, it will go well with him.  When his troubles will begin will be when by any chance something goes wrong with the governing machine. […]

The worst that can be said against them is that they have their failings.  They themselves do not know this; they consider themselves perfect, which is foolish of them.  They even go so far as to think themselves superior to the Anglo-Saxon: this is incomprehensible.  One feels they must be pretending.

(The section I put into boldface is positively chilling, considering what the next fifty years were to bring.)

Probably Should Keep My Mouth Shut...

(As a female Michael, maybe this is one of those subjects I have no business addressing, but maybe it's for that very reason that I find it of interest...)

I read a story today that included a list of the names that grew the fastest in popularity in 2009.  Three of the top ten are "Twilight names"-- names that (it seems very likely) were chosen more often because of their appearance in the Twilight series.  (The names, in case you're wondering, are Cullen-- #1 on the list!-- Emmett, and Jasper.)

Well, I suppose it's a step up from naming your baby after someone in a soap opera... I mean, they're books, so there's reading involved, which imparts a certain degree of "class"... But still.

Who am I to judge, though?  Go ahead!  Add another little "Cullen" to the world.  For the rest of his life, everyone will know that Mommy has/had a thing for YA vampire fiction, but so be it!  I guess it's no worse than naming a baby after a popular song or a president's daughter.

I can even try to understand.  Maybe you just really liked the name "Jasper"...  "It's so different," you think.  "So fresh!"  And it doesn't hurt that you also like the character.  Of course, now it won't be quite such a unique name, but, eh, it's different enough.  Now to just figure out how to convince your husband that it's a great idea to name your infant son after a sparkly vampire...

(And yes, I realize that this is an old story.  Fortunately, few people read this blog for breaking news.)

One More Book...

This morning, I remembered that when I wrote my book blog post the other day, I didn't mention that I'd read the last in the Huger Games trilogy, before I finished the last Lucia book and picked up Never Let Me Go.  (So, if you haven't read The Hunger Games, Catching Fire, and Mockingjay, this probably won't be interesting for you... and there are spoilers, too.  Beware!)

(No, seriously.  There are **SPOILERS** down there.  Just walk away now and nobody has to get hurt.)


I had been looking forward to the conclusion of the series, because I enjoyed the first two books-- especially the first.  I didn't really know what to expect, but I didn't expect what it turned out to be.  It wasn't necessarily a bad book, but it just felt... weak, somehow, and weakening.   

Honestly, much of the book has already faded in my memory, but from what I recall, Mockingjay felt too, too dark.  Yeah, I know it's about war.  However, the first two books also dealt with dark subjects, but for whatever reason, they never felt utterly hopeless and despairing like this one did.  It was like this:  "DARK DARK DARKER *occasional spot in which Katniss is (annoyingly, inexplicably) Little Miss Perfect Heroine™*, and now back to your regularly scheduled DARK DARK DARKNESS." 

Side note:  Maybe I've forgotten something... but didn't it turn out that Katniss' attempt to get close enough to President Snow to kill him-- the decision to sneak into the heart of the city-- was... well, totally unnecessary?  Argh!  I mean, (again) yeah, sure, that's probably realistic.  But that makes it even more frustrating that so many characters ended up killed during that "special operation".  (And this is just one example of how irritating this book was to me.)

Even the conclusion, in which the romantic subplot is finally resolved, just doesn't feel like nearly enough.  Maybe it's realistic, but it's a very sad reality... and it didn't feel in keeping with the beginning of the series.  It was a let-down.  It just fizzled.  I felt that we readers (not to mention Katniss and Peeta) deserved something a little better than that. 

Anyway, I suppose it's a good enough book for what it is-- thought-provoking, moving, and so on.  It's just not one I'm clamoring to re-read. 

Musing on Books Recently Read

I know, I haven't posted in forever.  And now that I am going to post, it's just a little rambling about books.  I started it about a month ago, so about time I finished it, I guess!

It's very snippety, but here it is (such as it is-- the type of thing no-one will care about except possibly myself):

- - - - -

I'm on my last Lucia novel, slowly reading my way through it. (Present Day Me:  Actually, I've finished it, now.  ...Not that I have anything more to add because of that, really...) It's funny how much those characters have grown on me.  Some books you love instantly, but these took a little longer, I'll admit.  Now, that world of characters feels like a cozy retreat from the little troubles of everyday life. 

I found (and watched) a small snippet of the old (1980s? 1990s?) BBC adaptation of the novels and was not exactly enthralled.  Maybe the series is better in other parts, but even the affected accents were a bit of a put-off.  Yes, of course I knew the characters are British, but when I read they don't sound quite that "snobby British" in my head. (Great, now I've offended the one British person who'll happen to find this on a Google search. Sorry!  I'm sure you don't sound snobbish. (g))

- - - - -

Donald and I read Ronia, the Robber's Daughter a while ago.  It was... ok.  It's one of those books that I think I would've liked more had I read it as a child, but as an adult reading it for the first time... it was a little too simple for my taste.  (And why bother creating fantastical creatures in a book if you're barely even going to use them?)  I couldn't help feeling exasperated with some of the characters, since it was so clear that most of their problems could have been solved by just talking.  That's probably more irritating to me now than it would've been when I was eight or nine, though, and goodness knows, plenty of adult books and real-life situations are just as frustrating for the same reason.  (Note of dubious interest:  Apparently the book was adapted to film at some point.  I think Donald said he went to see it on a school trip-- what we would've called a "field trip".)

- - - - -

The "Jeeves & Wooster" P.G. Wodehouse (I almost typed "Wodestock"! which would be a great name for a Wodehouse convention, if such a thing existed... and maybe it does...) book we're currently reading (er, make that were currently reading)--Much Obliged, Jeeves-- is much what you'd expect, if you're at all familiar with Wodehouse and/or the Jeeves books.  So far, what has most impressed itself upon us is the increased frequency with which Wooster (our narrator) mentions his old school-days prize for Scripture Knowledge.  (g)  Poor guy, he must need an ego-boost.

- - - - -

What we're actually reading now is something by Jerome K. Jerome, author of Three Men in a Boat (which I highly recommend to people who like to laugh)-- a collection of essays titled Idle Thoughts of an Idle Fellow.  It's not completely even in quality.  The first essay, for instance, "On Being Idle", I seem to recall as thoroughly hilarious and insightful.  Then later on there was a bit that was just too, too flowery... and somewhat unflattering to women, I must say... and that a certain professor I once had would definitely have labeled as "trite".  Unfortunately, that style has popped up a couple of times, so far, but there's still plenty to enjoy.  It's surprising (thought it really shouldn't be) how little human nature and thought has changed since this piece was written in the late 1800s.  

(Why does that still feel surprising?  However, maybe it's not so much the fact that it's still true after so much time that's a surprise.  It's just that odd sensation of, "now, how did he know that about me?!"-- which can happen with books from any era... and which can be either unsettling or comforting, depending on how you choose to look at it.)

- - - - -

My last read was Never Let Me Go, by Kazuo Ishiguro.  This is my first experience with this author, though we already have two more of his novels (thanks to one of the big library book sales).  I probably wouldn't have started with this one if it weren't for the movie adaptation that's coming out (already come out?).  I saw it mentioned on TV and thought I'd better read it before spoilers began proliferating.

On that note, I should mention that there will be spoilers for the novel, from here on out.  So if you don't want it ***SPOILED*** by ***SPOILERS FOR NEVER LET ME GO***... I repeat BIG BAD SPOILERS DEAD AHEAD... then you might want to avoid the rest of this entry.

...There.  If I wasn't all alone before, I am now.  ;o)

Points of interest:

- Some of the story was given away in the blurbs on the cover-- and (as I mentioned before) now there's "entertainment news" chatter about the film adaptation to avoid, as well.  I wonder how the experience would've been different without any of those spoilers... As it was, since I already knew the children were clones, there weren't any shocking revelations I can recall.  I'm not sure if there were even meant to be any, though...  I like it when authors give me the chance to figure at least parts of the story out on my own, but in this case, I wish I'd been stunned at the end.  I kept hoping I'd be wrong about the novel's conclusion.  Unfortunately, not this time.

- Again we have the old "why didn't they just TALK??" issue (repeatedly). I mean, I guess it's a reflection of what frequently happens in real life, but it still irritates me beyond all get-out.  Maybe more than it does in real life... Also irritating:  Why did Cathy let Ruth walk all over her, so much of the time?  I'm annoyed with Ruth for being such a bossy you-know-what, but then I can't help but feel angry with Cath for not standing up for herself.  And then there's Tommy, who is also annoying because he's so needy-- too weak to express his feelings for Cath-- and just plain kind-of-stupid.  (Sorry, dude, but you're not the brightest bulb.)  Yes, yes, I still feel desperately sorry for the characters, but I still manage to find them annoying.  It's this special talent I have.  Maybe I'm trying to distance myself from the emotional drain of reading the novel by being miffed at every single character in it... Or maybe I'm just mean.  Draw your own conclusions, but please keep them to yourself. ;o)

- It seems that everyone asks this question-- except those who appear to be mortally offended by it, for some reason:  Why didn't they run away??  I guess the answer is that it simply doesn't occur to them, as they've been raised to blindly accept their allotted role as organ donors.  Then there's the practical thought that even if they had, there wasn't anywhere for them to have gone.  They had little-to-no real-world skills-- no money-- few possessions--  no family or friends to turn to for help (outside of the system of donors, carers, and clinics/"centres").  There was nowhere for them to run, I suppose, but the absolute hopelessness of the situation-- sensing from the beginning that they wouldn't escape, but still reading on and hoping that maybe they'd at least try, even if it meant only a week or two of comparative freedom... It was a painful, "heavy-heart" read.

The story certainly makes you grateful for the opportunity and freedom you've had in your own life (and also makes you question how you've used those opportunities and just how free anyone ever really is... and then there's that whole, "oh yeah, we're all going to die, someday" thing!), but I can't see myself re-reading this one.  Once was enough. 


After that heart-wringer, I'm ready for something familiar and comforting... Either Jane Eyre or some L.M.M., maybe...

Two Pet Peeves

Pet Peeve #1:  
The term "pet peeve".  I have disliked it since the first time I recall hearing it.  I'm not sure why (or why I still use it on occasions such as these...).  The same goes for "fav" or "fave" instead of "favorite" (though in the time of Twitter, one may be excused for using the abbreviation under duress-- stupid 140 character limit!).



Pet Peeve #2:
Introductions (or cover/jacket-flap blurbs) that give away the story (in a book, but spoilery blurbs on DVDs are just as annoying).  Personally, I've rarely read an introduction that didn't give away something-- and frequently, everything-- so why do publishers insist on putting them at the front of the book?!  These days, I know enough to carefully skip introductions, so I'm safe-- but it's still irritating.  Maybe they think that so few people actually read introductions that it won't be a problem, but in that case, why bother with them at all?  It feels more like they assume that you've read the book before-- a dangerous and baseless assumption.  Either that or they delight in ruining things for other readers.

It's a temptation:  "Hey, you!  Yeah, you with the book!  I know you're a reader.  (You've got a book in your hands right now, haven't you?)  I know you're the type who'll read anything-- cereal boxes, toothpaste labels, even the occasional piece of junk mail.  Why not try a nice, juicy introduction, eh?  {sly smile}  What's that?  Spoilers?  No, no, nothing like that here.  What, you think we'd be rude enough to put spoilers in an intro?  What kind of sense would that make?  No, I assure you, you're safe reading this one.  In fact, if you don't read it, you'll be missing out on all sorts of relevant information about the author's history-- things that would make reading the novel so much richer an experience.  Here.  Why not just try the first paragraph?  If that one turns out ok, you can read further..."

Driver's License & Books

Driver's License--

Last Friday, I got mine renewed.  And as far as the state knows, I still weigh a modest 115 pounds.  The woman* I dealt with handed me a printed slip (like a receipt) and asked me to review my information and sign at the bottom if it was correct.  I hesitated, then "admitted" that the weight wasn't quite accurate.  I got the impression that she didn't really care and would probably prefer if I just signed the darn thing, since otherwise she'd have to go to the trouble of entering the new information and printing out a revised slip for me to sign.  Very well, then!  As I don't see how it makes any real difference one way or the other, I shall remain 115 pounds-- at least for the next four years. 


*Or should I call her a girl?  She was probably younger than I am.  This is something I still have trouble coming to terms with-- that so many of the "service people" I have cause to interact with in the everyday world are actually younger than I am, now.  Of course, this will only become more common as time goes by, but it still feels strange, when I think about it. 

Books--

I finished reading Don't Look Now (Daphne du Maurier) a couple weeks or so ago.  I think "The Birds" was my favorite story in the collection.  "The Blue Lenses", "Kiss Me Again, Stranger", and "Don't Look Now" were also a cut above the rest, in my opinion.  "Indiscretion" and "La Sainte-Vierge" felt like they didn't quite belong with the rest of the stories... "Split Second" is an interesting concept, but left me frustrated and disappointed.  And "Monte Verità"... Well, I found it to be a bit of a snoozefest, to be honest.  Anna and her whole "no possessions / truth quest" thing was mostly irritating and left me ice cold.  (Obviously I'm not one of the sacred Chosen Ones. Oh well.)  All in all, though, worth a read if you like tales of the macabre.

After that, I read Shirley Jackson's We Have Always Lived in the Castle.  I can't recall where I originally heard about it, but the title and blurb intrigued me.  I found it an absorbing read-- one of those novels where not a whole lot seems to happen (apart from a few notable exceptions), yet you're still compelled to keep reading.  The "twist" wasn't much of a surprise.  I think most readers must at least consider that possibility, even if they aren't certain about it.  Fortunately, it doesn't seem to suffer from the lack of a startling revelation.

I've never been an avid reader of poetry (even less so now that no-one "makes" me read it), so maybe my opinion on this is skewed, but I feel this story has a poetic atmosphere-- poetic prose.  It's partly that the narrator, Merricat, has a vivid (often morbid) imagination and an odd way of looking at things.  It's also Constance's appreciation of and attention to little things (gardening, preparing food) that makes them seem so vital and all-consuming and beautiful.  Whatever it is, it's an unusual concoction-- a mix of uneasiness with cozy comfort-- the familiar mingling with the bizarre. 

I've since read that the author suffered from agoraphobia, which (if true) explains a lot about the novel.  Almost all the novel takes place within the confines of a carefully fenced property, and as the story progresses, their world gets smaller and smaller.  I can sympathize, as I am something of a homebody-- usually happiest when not out in the world, not having to interact face-to-face with many strangers-- generally content to stay in my own little place, walking the same paths, following the same routines.  However, by the very end...

Um... There will be some spoilers in this next paragraph...

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S



As I was saying, by the very end, even I found their circumstances cramped and sad.  Cardboard over the windows?  Junk piles as barriers against the world?  Resorting to wearing tablecloths-- being afraid that one of their two whole teacups might break-- rather than taking some of their (apparently plentiful supply of) money into town and buying the necessities?  They profess their happiness-- the last words of the novel-- but I felt sad for them. 


E
N
D

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S



Ok!  Done with spoilers, now!


In the meantime, I also listened to an audio versions of The Hunger Games and read Catching Fire.  (I'd seen them mentioned a couple of times in different places, and then Rachel started tweeting about how great they were, so I had to check them out.)  They're YA novels-- kind of like a more violent, frightening version of The Giver-- about a distopian future in which children/teens are forced into a fight-to-the-death for the amusement of a "Capitol" audience-- and as a reminder of the Capitol's dominance of the citizens of territories that once attempted a revolt.  It's an action-packed series with a gripping storyline.  I'm looking forward to the last novel in the trilogy, due out this month.  (This is one of the benefits of waiting a while before you start reading series.)

Recent Happenings and Doings

Monday, after leaving the first load of laundry in the washer, I discovered that it would fill and agitate as usual, but refused to drain (and because it couldn't drain, I didn't try the rinse or spin cycles).  To put a long story short(er), Donald removed a broken lid switch (a safety feature that causes the machine to automatically stop agitating and spinning when the lid is opened), and (because we didn't feel that this particular safety feature was vital for us) he hotwired it, if that's the word I'm looking for. . .   Anyway, he bypassed the lid switch, and that did the trick.  (Though we did have to start a whole new washing cycle to get the thing to realize that all was well.)  Thanks to my heroic handyman (and a bit of electric tape), I was able to wash clothes again.  (And there was much rejoicing.)  I just have to be very careful to resist the powerful urge to stick my arms into the machine while it's moving.  I may have to tie a string around my finger to remind myself.

- - - - - - -

Entertainment...  (film, TV, books)...

We've been watching all three Lord of the Rings movies with the RiffTrax commentaries (because the third one just came out).  It was funny, but I think I've had enough super-long movies for a while.

We've finally caught up to season three of Chuck.  I'm enjoying this season less than the previous two, so far.  I don't care for the whole Shaw storyline, and my patience with Sarah/Sam is growing thin, too.  There's still plenty of time for it to improve, though. 

The last two books we've read together:
Shades of Grey, by Jasper Fforde
Thoroughly enjoyable.  The first in a series (a trilogy, I think), though, so there are unanswered questions/unresolved conflicts at the end. It's difficult to categorize-- somewhat fantasy, a little sci-fi, definitely mystery.  Most of its charm (for me) was its sense of humor and the fun of trying to figure things out from the tidbits of information the author doles out a little at a time.

Something Fresh, by P.G. Wodehouse
This was the first non-Jeeves/Wooster Wodehouse we'd read-- or at least the first I'd read.  Donald may have listened to some on tape back when he had a long commute.  This book introduces a different set of characters-- the Blandings Castle set.  So far, I prefer the Jeeves and Wooster set, but this group of characters is entertaining, too.  (However, I did find that my favorite parts were those that could just as easily have been set in a Jeeves and Wooster book.)  I didn't care so much for the slightly more serious, "romantic" parts of the book.  I turn to Wodehouse for humor; anything else is a bit disappointing.  I realize that this must not be much fun for an author-- being pigeonholed by an audience that is displeased when s/he ventures into new territory-- but there it is!  And since Mr. Wodehouse has been dead for quite some time, now, we need not worry about hurting his feelings.  ;o)

The last book I finished:
Mapp & Lucia, by E.F. Benson
It took me a little while to decide how I felt about the Lucia books.  (This is sacrilege to the true Luciaphile, I know.)  However, by now I know that I find them curiously interesting (particularly now that Miss Mapp's in the story).  I've seen this series described as a mixture of Wodehouse and Keeping Up Appearances, and that's the best explanation I've come across.  They're very much comedies of manners-- cozy, tangled webs, full of one-upmanship and friendly (?) rivalry-- small town/village stories about a handful of characters who take very careful note of one another's comings and goings.  Some of the characters behave in the most horrifying ways, yet you find yourself still interested in them, even if you don't always like them.  They all suffer occasional downfalls, which may be what keeps you from simply despising them. 

What I'm reading now:
Don't Look Now, by Daphen Du Maurier
I'm into the fourth story in this collection of short stories (some of which are fairly longish).  So far I've read "Don't Look Now", "The Birds", "Escort", and most of "Split Second".  ("The Birds" was creepier than the movie version, I think, by the way, and it's my favorite in this book so far.) 

Every so often, I'm in the mood to read macabre, spooky, suspenseful stories, but I usually end up feeling that something's missing from them.  I'm not sure exactly what I want that I'm not getting from these stories. . . Resolution?  That's frequently left out in favor of something "artistically" open-ended.  (Either that, or everything just falls apart at the end, as with the bulk of what I've seen from Stephen King, who can spin a scary story but hardly ever brings it all together in a satisfying conclusion.)  However, sometimes there's a definite end/resolution-- as in "Don't Look Now" and "Escort"-- but it's still not quite there, up to the level I'd hoped it would be.  Generally, short works are not as satisfying to me as full-length novels, and most of the creepy things I read do tend to be short stories. . .  Or maybe I'm just too picky.  I'm enjoying these stories well enough, though I think I'll be ready to return to a more cozy, prosaic genre by the end of the book. 

- - - - - - -

The bunnies (wild rabbits) are a little crazy this year.  I guess they've decided that the entire yard is theirs, now, and frequently the dogs get to do a little bunny-chasing when they are let outside.  Twice the other morning a bunny was just a couple of yards from our house, right where Trixie could see it-- and growl a low, throaty growl-- and bark-- and continue to bark, at intervals, single, startlingly loud barks-- long after the offending bunny had decamped and the yard been declared "all clear".  This was not good for my nerves.  (I hope it isn't a sign that I'm turning into Mrs. Bennet from Pride and Prejudice.)

- - - - - - -

After a first attempt at knitting, a week or two ago, I haven't picked it back up again.  The casting-on part (long-tail cast-on) was ok, once I knew exactly what I was supposed to do, but the first row after that was awful. Trying to get the needles to do what I wanted-- ugh, it filled me with disgust, even though I tried to remember that when I first started crocheting, the crochet hook didn't immediately bend to my will, either.  I think part of the problem may have been the yarn I was using.  It was a partial skein I had only because it was bundled with some other yarn I wanted to buy at a thrift store.  It was nasty, nasty stuff (and I use almost only acrylics when I crochet, so if I say it's nasty, you may believe me that it was).  Scratchy, catchy, yuck.  Next time-- assuming there is a next time-- I'll use something a little nicer, even if whatever I make is likely to turn out ugly because I'm a rank amateur.

I suppose I still would like to learn to knit, if it doesn't turn out to be too much of a pain to get the hang of it.  The problem is that what I really want to knit is lacy fabric, and from what I gather, that's the type of thing that many even fairly seasoned knitters view with trepidation.  I wonder know how much of that is exaggerated-- or just people overestimating the difficulty of knitting lace / lace knitting-- or if it really is that much more difficult. . .  I have a lot of confidence in the idea that if you want to do something badly enough, you can make it work, but I'm not sure if I do care that much.  Especially when there are so many lacy things I could just crochet, instead.  It's not exactly the same look, but it's beautiful in it own right.  . . .We'll see.

- - - - - - -

I'm forgetting some things (probably some things more interesting than the stuff I did manage to remember), but this entry has been "in the works" for long enough, as it is! 

Pointless Babble

Only three rounds of pointless babble this time.

- - - - - - -

1. Does Twitter have a monopoly on "pointless babble"? I think not.

I'm now following The Drudge Report on Twitter-- by far the most prolific entity on my list. One of their tweets the other day was a link to a story about how one study (with a sample of a measly 2,000 tweets, however) determined that 40 percent of tweets are "pointless babble". (Their example of "pointless babble" was something like "I'm eating a sandwich now", by the way.)

Measly sample size aside, I'd say the findings are accurate-- if anything, they may be a little low-- but remarkably unsurprising. Haven't people known all along that Twitter is designed for pointless babble? Or at least that's what I tell myself, since babbling is just about all I do on Twitter-- usually pointlessly.

After reading something like that-- and honestly, even before reading the article-- I think twice before tweeting. This may be difficult to believe, for those of you who either "follow" me on Twitter or read my tweets right here on this blog and see my snoozy observations on weather, how tired I am, or what Trixie happens to be doing at the moment, but I've actually been holding back my most boring tweets. I frequently stop myself in mid-tweet. "Nah. That's just too boring to bother people with" Or-- "I don't want it to sound like all I ever do is grumble, so... (backspace backspace backspace)"...

I wonder how many Twitter users feel this pressure to be interesting-- to stay upbeat (or cool and dark, depending on the personality)-- to censor themselves when they begin to feel that they've been doing too much babbling. (Note that I only insinuated that I feel the pressure to be interesting and upbeat-- not that I actually achieve a high level of interest and cheeriness. Just wanted to make sure that was clear. (g))

As someone who only tweets "on the side" and really prefers a blog for the long haul, my next thought naturally is of the blog. I may curb my tongue (fingers?) on Twitter, but my blog is at least 40% pointless babble, too. I'm going to try to forget I ever thought about that, though, and just keep on blogging away, one tedious entry at a time. The good thing about my blog is that there's no fluctuating "follower" count to avoid noticing every time I log on.

- - - - - - -

2. Trixie may not be destined for print, after all. (Oops.)

I may have spoken too soon about Trixie being in the I Has a Hotdog book. The last e-mail we got on the subject indicated that there's still some chance of the photo not making the cut. (Though they did sound encouraging.) I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

No, this doesn't really matter-- only I'll feel silly for having mentioned it at all, if it doesn't pan out. And it would be fun to see one of our dogs in a Real Book.

- - - - - - -

3. "Island Flyover" is fun.

My current favorite thing on the Wii is the Resort's "Island Flyover" game. It's not a very structured, competitive game, which is probably a big part of why I like it right now. Just between the two three however-many of us there are, I can sometimes be a little too competitive. (No comment necessary, Donald :oP) A non-competitive solo game is a nice break from losing to the meanie computer for the nth time in a row at ping pong table tennis.

For those who don't know, in this game you fly a little plane around the island resort looking for (marked) points of interest and/or popping balloons by shooting them or flying into them. I like games with a little of a treasure hunt in them, and this one is also something where you can just sit back and enjoy the view, too-- particularly once you unlock the sunset and night-time options.

- - - - - - -

The End.