Main

March 1, 2010

Me so sad and lonely, me

And so February ends, and March comes in like a lion. Seems to happen almost every year.

February wasn’t a bad month for this Tohu Bohu, looking at it, with more than a post a day, many of them notes of some substance rather than brief jokes or simple links. 46 comments on the month, which seems to be about the expected level of comments if I don’t have a particularly good guessing game going on. Note to self: Guessing games generate comments! At least with my Gentle Readers.

I mention this because I didn’t write an anniversary post, when my anniversary came around in the middle of the month sometime. Seven years and still going. Whoo.

Oh, and I’m a bit down about the blogging thing, at the moment, because—well, this is probably as pathetic as it can be, but it’s like this: two fellows I grew up with have gotten into this blogging thing in a big way. Now, I have been blogging for more than seven years, now, and (a) it has been at least six years since I decided I didn’t want to be an A-list blogger, and (2) both of those fellows are blogging stuff that they have, you know, degrees in, spend their working lives doing, and are actual experts in. So I shouldn’t be downhearted about the fact that they are both hugely successful at the form. Right? And I am pleased about their success—really, I am. And I truly do not want to become one of those bloggers with tens of thousands of readers, whose every mistake is fodder for widespread abuse and invective, even if the mistakes were not actually mine but someone else’s.

In fact, as this Tohu Bohu has settled into its two or three dozen Gentle Readers, it has become more personal and less political, more musing and less amusing, more what it is and less what it isn’t. There’s no real reason why the A-List would come calling here, or would stay here if it did, or would make me happy if it did stay. And yet…

Really, though, Your Humble Blogger is just being cranky and unhumble. I put a lot of effort into this thing I say, as I walk the streets of Blogtown muttering to myself, seven years, two thousand three hundred and seventy-seven notes, and what have I got to show for it?

This is because crankiness makes it hard to see what it is that a person really does have to show for it. It doesn’t diminish what I actually have, just makes it a bit difficult to see.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

December 31, 2009

The End of the Decade

So. Here it is the last day of the year, and there are two problems: (1) I have a bunch of Book Reports to do, and (B) I don’t know what they are. You see, I left the little thumb drive at my desk when I left the office a week ago, and the list was in a file on that drive. Silly of me? Yes. But there it is.

I do, as it happens, have enough memory to come up with a list of five or so unreported books. So I could spend the afternoon whipping through them. On the other hand, I am in a lovely house on a lovely day with some lovely family, and I may have better things to do. And the reports would, I hope, be better if I wait and spend some time on them. So I think I’m going to put them off, and then backdate them to today, so when I do my End of the Year List, I have the rightish numbers.

That’s more or less a warning that things will be slow here for a few days, and then look like they weren’t. As well as a general wish for a Happy New Year.

And while I’m thinking about Happy New Years, I have to ask if anybody else feels sort of, well, guilty about having had quite a good year and quite a good decade? I mean, yes, in the Big Picture, this was a nasty decade for a variety of reasons, and the year has been absolutely brutal in a bunch of ways, but very little of that affected my comfort and pleasure, except that I read about it and groused about it, and frankly enjoyed doing it, much of the time. In my life, I had two lovely children, lived in some interesting and pleasant places, read a lot of good books, ate a lot of good food, listened to very good music, had wonderful conversations with wonderful people, got to do theater again and had a lot of fun doing it, created this Tohu Bohu, bought a house in which I live quite comfortably, and just basically had a really good decade.

I wasn’t drafted to fight in the horrible wars, and almost nobody I know has had to fight in them or die in them. I distantly know a few people who were killed or hurt or bereaved by the destruction of the World Trade Center, but the terrorism thing had a very small direct effect on my personal life, as did the Katrina thing, climate change, the Bush administration, the financial collapse, etc, etc, etc.

In point of actual fact, I am one of those affluent, well-educated, middle-class, comfortable white suburbanites who is insulated from a lot of terrible things in the world (so long as they don’t actually happen on my block or to my immediate family). You know? Maybe you are, too. And it’s good for me to remember that, now and then. But when I read about the lousiness of the year and of the decade, I feel like I have to add that of course, for me personally it was pretty cushy. And I feel sheepish about that, as if not only should I have done more out of my own comfort to ameliorate the misery of others (which is certainly true) but also it would have helped, somehow, had I not escaped misery myself (which is not). Still, there it is. I hope the next decade will be as good for everybody else as this last one has been for me.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

December 25, 2009

Happy New Year! Again!

Almost ten years ago now, at a party in Ess Eff, while my Best Reader is off getting some more of those noshy things, and I’m trying to pretend that I know more than two of the people there:

YHB: Hey.

YHB2K: Happy New Year!

YHB: Yeah. Happy New Year. Recognize me?

YHB2K: Um, didn’t we work together at the…

YHB: No, I’m you from ten years in the future.

YHB2K: Wow. Really?

YHB: Really.

YHB2K: Only ten years? Shame about the hair.

YHB: Shut up.

YHB2K: Could be worse, I suppose.

YHB: Look, I am visiting from ten years in your future, through the magic of Fiction, to write a note for my blog.

YHB2K: Your what?

YHB: That’s not important. There’s a meme where you get to ask me three questions about the next ten years.

YHB2K: A what?

YHB: A meme!

YHB2K: Sorry, it’s really loud in here!

YHB: No, it turns out your hearing is going!

YHB2K: What?

YHB: You have a banana in your ear!

YHB2K: What?

YHB: I said you have a banana in your ear!

YHB2K: I can’t hear you, I have a banana in my ear! [they both laugh far too much]

YHB2K: Seriously, what?

YHB: Look, you get to ask me three questions about the next ten years.

YHB2K: Are there rules?

YHB: Of course there are rules.

YHB2K: Of course there are rules.

YHB: Rule Number One!

YHB2K: Which I will call Rule Number One!

YHB: No asking really personal stuff.

YHB2K: Why not? Because it will cause a paradox and, like, destroy the entire space-time continuum?

YHB: No, but I’m writing under a pseudonym, and personal stuff would totally ruin it. YHB2K: Oh. Well, that’s too bad. Are you getting paid?

YHB: Is that one of your questions?

YHB2K: No, but are you?

YHB: No.

YHB2K: Then what are you doing it for?

YHB: Shut up.

YHB2K: No you shut up.

YHB: No, me shut up, but ten years ago.

YHB2K: Ooh.

YHB: Hah!

YHB2K: Jerk.

YHB: Rule Number B!

YHB2K: You mean Rule Number Two.

YHB: What?

YHB2K: The last one was One, so this one should be Two, not B.

YHB: It’s a bit.

YHB2K: What?

YHB: Look, do you want to hear the rules?

YHB2K: Fine. Rule Number B!

YHB: No asking stuff that like who won the World Series or what stocks go up and down and shit.

YHB2K: Would that cause a paradox?

YHB: No, but there wouldn’t be much point. You’re going to forget pretty much this whole conversation.

YHB2K: Why? Do you have some sort of forgeterry flashlight like Tommy Lee Jones? Or is it the power of the space-time continuum preventing a paradox?

YHB: No, you’re just really, really drunk.

YHB2K: Oh, yeah. I forgot.

YHB: Plus, how would that be entertaining for people reading this? They could look that stuff up. If they cared.

YHB2K: So this is just about entertaining people reading your whateveritis?

YHB: Yeah.

YHB2K: I’m supposed to be your dancing monkey?

YHB: Pretty much.

YHB2K: Ook ook! Oook ook!

YHB: Do you want to ask the questions or not?

YHB2K: Can’t ask my future self questions, because I’m too busy dancing like a monkey! Oook oook!

YHB: Hey—do you know what really would cause a paradox and destroy the space-time continuum?

YHB2K: What?

YHB: If you were to bite me!

YHB2K: Well, I’d better not do that, then.

YHB: No, probably not.

YHB2K: Because otherwise…

YHB: Yeah. You could bite me.

YHB2K: A tragic loss for us all.

YHB: Rule Number Gamma!

YHB2K: This is a stupid bit.

YHB: Really? I like it.

YHB2K: No, I don’t.

YHB: Yeah, but you will.

YHB2K: I’ll also look like that.

YHB: Shut up. Rule Number Gamma!

YHB2K: Yes?

YHB: Can I have a glass of that bubbly?

YHB2K: Is that the rule?

YHB: No.

YHB2K: Will it rip a hole in the space-time continuum?

YHB: What the hell are you drinking? No, it won’t rip a hole in the space-time continuum.

YHB2K: Fine.

YHB: Rule Number Gamma! Um.

YHB2K: There aren’t really any more rules, are there?

YHB: No.

YHB2K: Fine. I get three questions? From 1999 me to 2009 me?

YHB: Yes.

YHB2K: For the purpose of entertaining some people in 2009?

YHB: Yes.

YHB2K: You suck.

YHB: Shut up.

YHB2K: No, you should do it the other way. You should ask questions about 2019, right? And then go ahead and answer them. That would be fun. This is stupid.

YHB: But I don’t have a 2019 me.

YHB2K: You will. I will. We will. Whatever.

YHB: Good point.

YHB2K: I know. I’m clever that way.

YHB: You’re drunk that way.

YHB2K: Yeah, but in the morning, I’ll be sober. And you, my friend, will still be. Um.

YHB: You?

YHB2K: Shut up.

YHB: All right, as long as I’m here, do you want to ask your questions?

YHB2K: Sure. Um, Question A: Are there going to be any more good Elvis Costello albums?

YHB: Yes.

YHB2K: OK, good. Um, where am I living?

YHB: I guess that counts. Connecticut. Greater Hartford.

YHB2K: Seriously?

YHB: Yes.

YHB2K: Do I like it?

YHB: Yeah. It’s real nice, actually.

YHB2K: Hunh.

YHB: No, it is.

YHB2K: OK.

YHB: You get another question.

YHB2K: OK, this isn’t about the World Series, but—I’m just curious, does anybody break Hank Aaron’s record?

YHB2K: Yeah.

YHB: Junior Griffey?

YHB: No, actually, it’s Barry Bonds.

YHB2K: Seriously?

YHB: Yeah. He bulks up, hits 73 to break the single-season, and finishes with 762.

YHB2K: Really?

YHB: As a Giant. Stays with the Giants.

YHB2K: That. is. so. cool.

YHB: Um.

YHB2K: No, really? This is going to be a great decade.

YHB: I have to go now.

YHB2K: Happy New Year, me! Happy New Year.

YHB: And to all a good night.

So, here’s the game: Ask your ten-year-future self three questions about the upcoming decade (the teenies, until we come up with a better name). No rules for you, but don’t waste any asking for stock tips. Then, all your friends answer them for you in the comments before New Year’s Eve 2009. Then, on or shortly before New Year’s Eve 2019, come back and award points for closest answer! Extra points for everyone who is still alive!

Here are mine:

  1. Which countries will I visit in the teenies?
  2. What produce shortage will I complain about most?
  3. Which song from my youth will be covered by a popular artist and be on the radio all the time to irritate me?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

December 22, 2009

Say, Say, What does this say?

Your Humble Blogger was a Beginning Reader once, believe it or not as you like, and just at the right time for Hop on Pop, the simplest Seuss for youngest use. In due time, the book was purchased for my Perfect Non-Reader, and is being enjoyed by the Youngest Member (who loves to shout No, Pat, No! Don’t sit on that! as loud as loud can be). This note is not about how wonderful that book is, but about how…interesting written English is.

You see, for many years, YHB’s mother would say, when the subject of HoP came up, which was quite often, in fact, as she is now a grandmother of six, that what she always appreciated about the book was that all the words could be sounded out by the letters, with the exception of night and fight. I accepted that this was the case during my years as an uncle-but-not-yet-father, so I was surprised to notice, when reading the book over and over and over and over again to my Perfect Non-Reader, back in the early part of the noughties, that it was false. Right at the very beginning, after pup and cup, comes house and mouse, with their silent e. Not that I should properly hold my mother to an observation made from memory and all, but there it is. And the silent e is more common than the silent gh, but it is still silent, and not amenable to sounding out.

We’re talking, by the way, about the big boldface words at the top of the pages. For those who do not have a copy to hand, a page will have two or three such words, a sentence using them, and an illustration. The sentences, of course, have some tricky words, but as one is teaching a child to read by the endorsed combination of phonics and whole word recognition, the point is that one can sound out the headwords as a key to the page. Right? And most of them (there are 68 of them, at a quick count) are easy to sound out, but there are four which are not.

Except that I was reading the book to the Youngest Member today, and noticed that there were th words, too. Now, it’s not that I think that the phonics system can’t handle th combinations (or sh or ch, for that matter), but it falls into the category with silent e and silent gh, requiring more than just a simple letter-to-sound correspondence. And I had not noticed it at all. I had been reading the thing with the idea of that letter-to-sound correspondence in my mind, noticed the mouse/house problem, and totally failed to spot the th issue. In about a million times through the book. Including the page that has the words tree and three in big bold letters, one right under the other.

And then, when I sat down to write this note, and went through to count the boldface words and look at them carefully, and went through them again to make sure I wasn’t missing anything, that’s when I noticed that walk and talk each has a silent l. How many times have I looked at those words, specifically thinking about the letter-to-sound correspondence, and not had an alarm go off?

Perhaps this is just me, and the way I think of things. I learned to read very young, and mostly the whole language way, which (at least in my case and my vague sense of what people say about it) makes for lazy readers who just recognize words rather than read them, if you know what I mean. Perhaps somebody who learned under a stricter phonics method would have spotted the lot of them immediately. Perhaps somebody who battled dyslexia would have spotted them immediately. But I couldn’t. And I’m not absolutely certain that there aren’t more still that I haven’t missed.

By the way—yes, I know that vowels throw off that whole letter-to-sound combination thing. Is the second e in see silent? And there are song and long, with that ng issue. And the ck in snack and black. And if you count Mr. and Mrs. as headwords, then you really are up the proverbial without a whatnot. But I’m not counting them, and ck doesn’t have a silent letter any more than the ll in ball. So there.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

December 4, 2009

An Awkward Moment

So. Fairly often I am at the circulation desk taking care of a student when that student’s buddy comes up behind them and thwacks them one.

To give you a sense of things: as you enter the library, the circ desk is to your right, perpendicular to the door. Thus, when facing the desk, people are entering behind you and to your right. The café is directly behind you, and the stairs to the bulk of the stacks come down behind you as well. So it is easy for someone to sneak up on you, all unbeknownst, like. Also, most of our students are ‘college age’, between 17 and 22, say. A great age for thwacking your buddies in the back of the head, or on the shoulder, or kicking them in the seat of the pants.

My usual reaction to this is a Librarian’s Glare, second level, followed after the departure of the kids by quietly smiling to myself about the whole nature of homosociality. Except that sometimes it isn’t homosocial. Sometimes it is heterosocial. And my emotional reaction to that is very different.

Just to be clear, I am talking about a fellow giving a reasonably firm but not vicious punch in the shoulder, slap up the back of the head, or hip block to a young woman who doesn’t see him coming. Today (my inspiration for the post) it was actually a kick to the seat of the pants. Not a bruising blow, but not a nudge. What used to be called a love tap, back when spousal abuse was considered sweet.

In today’s case, the young woman responded with affectionate eye-rolling; she kissed him shortly after. I responded with a Class One Librarian’s Glare (with eyebrow raised to the full third level), and with this post.

I don’t mean to be all whatsit, but seriously, no young woman should allow herself to be treated with that kind of rough affection in public. That should not be tolerated in our library. It should make the practitioner of the kick (or slap or punch) an immediate social pariah. Not because the young woman is being harmed, and only somewhat because I suspect that a fellow who routinely kicks his girlfriend’s ass in affection will have difficulty restraining himself in anger, and not only because for the love of Mike she had no way of knowing it was you and if she had responded by instinctively grabbing the book off the counter and decking you with it she would have been well within her whatsit, but because that kind of roughhouse is bad, bad, bad for women everywhere, for the women sitting in the café, in the entrance, on the stairs, or working behind my counter who have to watch it. What are the odds, at any point, that there is a woman within view who has been the recipient of abuse from a family member, romantic partner or other boy friend? Fifty-fifty? More? From the numbers and demographics, I would guess closer to two-to-one.

And yet, I never say anything. I glare, and I shake my head, and I go back to my desk and type. Because in the world as it is, my saying something would be wildly inappropriate (and might lead to my being fired, depending on what I said and how I said it), and would not be welcomed by the student who was kicked, and furthermore as there is no overwhelming social norm backing me up, wouldn’t do much good, anyway. Sigh.

And another thing that makes me uncomfortable about the whole thing—I assume that when a young man thwacks another young man at the desk that they are not romantic partners. I do think that homosocial thwackage is a part of our social norms, and although I wouldn’t encourage a son of mine to adopt that kind of thing, I wouldn’t ground him for a week if I saw him do it. I see third-graders behaving that way in the schoolyard all the time, and I give them only two levels of eyebrow. If I saw a son of mine thwack a girl, especially from behind, it would be Groundhog Day for him, if you know what I mean. Is this sexist? In a way, I think so, but I also (being sexist in that way) think that the world being the world, abuse of women by men being so much more prevalent than any of the other combinations (as heinous as those are), a man thwacking a woman in public has a devastating symbolic weight. A man thwacking a man does not. I feel justified in making this distinction, and yet it nags at me, when I contemplate what my (outward) reaction should be to a thwack at the desk.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

November 28, 2009

Only Seventeen More Shopping Days 'til Beethoven's Birthday

So. Your Humble Blogger is forty years old. Y’all know what that’s like, right? Born at the end of the sixties, a boy of the seventies, eighties teenager. A different world from now.

And I grew up without Christmas, not being Christian, so my perception of things is very different, I expect, but it seems to me that when I was a kid, Thanksgiving and Christmas were in different seasons. Thanksgiving was the last of the Autumn holidays; Christmas was the first Winter holiday. It’s true that Christmas shopping started the day after Thanksgiving—Santa Claus arrived at the end of the Macy’s Day parade, of course, and the next day in our shopping malls. So I am probably exaggerating things in my memory. Still, that’s how I remember them: there was a Thanksgiving time, and then a Christmas time.

Also, I think I went to school on the day after Thanksgiving, at least some years. I could be wrong. I don’t remember planning or doing anything for that day, or shopping for that matter, as a kid. But then, would I remember anything like that? I don’t know. But I don’t.

I also don’t really know what it’s like to be a kid these days, see above. But it seems to me that it must be hard for a kid, a ten-year-old or an eight-year-old, to have this great big four-day-weekend for Thanksgiving, already half a month into the Christmas season, and then go back to school on Monday and realize that there are four more weeks of school, no breaks or holidays, and no presents, either. It must be a very long month.

Of course, Hanukkah is early this year, so our kids have that to look forward to. But not all the kids get to light candles and eat chocolate coins to make the time go by.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

November 26, 2009

Thanks, thanks, thanks

It is traditional, on the fourth Thursday in November, for blogs of this kind to post a maudlin essay about what the bloggist is thankful for.

Um. You know, stuff.

My Best Reader, of course, and my Perfect Non-Reader, and the Youngest Member who still cannot read, although he can fool you what with having memorized The Little Red Hen Makes a Pizza and Big Max and Danny and the Dinosaur. And other family members, immediate and in law, small and large, in this world or the next.

My astonishing level of comfort, and the country that makes it possible. And the moment in time—I’m grateful for the twenty-first century. The ability to cushion myself, with money and friends and stuff, from a lot of bad things.

Did I mention my friends? Gentle Readers, y’all count for that. I am thankful for you. I thank you.

The Talking Heads album Stop Making Sense, which I listened to today. I am thankful for that. I should send them a note.

Do you know what else? That thing where grapes ferment, under the right conditions, and make wine. I like wine. It’s kind of odd, when you think about it, that fermentation exists. If it didn’t exist, and you wrote it into a specfic world (there’s this chemical change which happens, which makes ordinary fruit juice become intoxicating when it rots, and it also changes the taste to make it more complex, and, um, you have whole industries of growing fruit just to rot it in just the right way) it wouldn’t be very plausible.

I am also thankful for how implausible the real world is, in so many ways.

The Internet. The personal computer. Telephone lines. The postal service, particularly—do you ever think about the idea that there might not have been one? At all? But there is. Well, done Ben Franklin. Thank you.

You remember that I’m thankful for the fermentation thing? I’m not so thankful for the tobacco curing thing, but I am very thankful that in twenty-first century America I only rarely go places where I come out stinking of tobacco. When I was a kid, thirty years ago, I must have had that cigarette stench on my clothes and in my hair all the time. We all must have. It was everywhere. Not so much today, so thanks for that.

I’ll add thanks that the email that I got yesterday from the President of the United States of America, mentioning the Thanksgiving observance, wasn’t irritating to get. It wasn’t hugely inspiring, although it was nice in places (I particularly liked the mention of people who have to work on Thanksgiving because it’s their job and they don’t have any choice, and that’s another thing I’m thankful for, that my job isn’t like that and I have the freedom to avoid work that is like that) and rather sweet in its overall tone, but (a) we have a President who doesn’t get up my nose just by being President, (2) we have a President who is capable of putting his name over more than three sentences without offending me in the text itself, and (iii) I got an email from the President of the United States of America. Seriously, I know it wasn’t personal, but that’s pretty swell.

I’m thankful that the Avot is around, and the whole Scripture, all of it. I probably won’t write about it on Saturday, but you never know, I might. It’s a free weekend, for the most part, and I am very thankful for that.

And for tea. Did I mention tea? In with the whole fermentation thing, and tobacco curing, there’s this plant, a tree really, the leaves of which, when dried and fermented and dried and steeped in hot water, well, you don’t believe any of this, do you? But you drink coffee.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

November 6, 2009

Not a Book Report, go elsewhere

Your Humble Blogger should probably stop calling them Book Reports. Book Notes? That seems kinda cutesy-cutesy to me. Book log, I suppose.

Somehow, this Tohu Bohu has floated to the top of searches for book report and certain titles. This has lead on at least three occasions, twice this week, to odd little comments on my blog asking where the actual book report is. I assume that these comments are from young persons who are tasked with writing a book report and are looking for assistance, or possibly for somebody else to do the work for them. Alas, I cannot help these people. Or at least, I won’t help them, and certainly what I write in this blog isn’t going to help them at all. Of the two newest seekers, one found a four-sentence note that just counts up the Dick Francis novels by tally, and one found a note (also found by someone else last Spring) that describes the subject as more like Charlotte’s Web than Treasure Island. I don’t know how a sixth-grader would make use of that.

Our Library is not the only person to use this phrase, but it’s something that we use as part of our introduction to internet research: on the Internet, nobody is in charge. I can post my Book Reports, and they will be utterly worthless to you, and there is nobody to complain to. I mean, you can complain to me, in the comments, but what do I care? I’m the one who is posting them. I won’t care. You can complain to Google that their search engine isn’t helping you, but (a) they really don’t care, either, and (2) they will point out that with just a little more work, you can get what you want and not what you don’t want. But you have to be in charge, because nobody is in charge. I am perfectly capable of writing a straight-faced Book Report that is utterly false in every particular (note: Alfred Nobel was not, actually, a hideously deformed monster who kept little boys in a cage to fatten them up for the stew) and ha ha on you, seeker after proper book reports.

No, dissatisfaction with my Book Reports among the non-GR populace does not lead me to rethink the whole Book Report thing I do the way I do. There are a handful of reasons I do Book Reports at all, and do them the way I do them, and assistance for elementary school students is not high on that list. It does, however, make me think about my comment-moderation practice.

My policy, as I have (I think) posted here before, is that I will happily delete and filter for spam, which I have some difficulty defining but the bulk of which I have no difficulty recognizing. I reserve the right to delete and/or edit for offensive content, but (a) I promise to indicate that I am doing so, and (2) I have not actually done so as yet. I don’t want to, either. My preference is to have more comments than fewer, and to have a wider spread than a narrower.

And, in general, I feel that I need some reason to delete a comment that is more than my dislike for it. I do refuse to be used as a tool for other people to make money by influencing search engine, and I don’t mind deleting messages that are gibberish, machine-generated, or pure advertising from outside the group. But attempts at communication, well, those I don’t want to delete.

On the other hand, there is no benefit to Grs, or to me, in having a comment that simply says where is the book report at the end of one of my notes. I don’t expect the commenter to come back and find out my thinking on the topic; perhaps I am wrong in that, but it’s hard for me to imagine the thinking that would bring the poor saps back to this Tohu Bohu. So responding directly in the comment thread seems to be like talking into a disconnected telephone. It just makes me feel foolish. And leaving the comment unanswered also seems foolish; the individual entries are, at least to my eyes, diminished by that line at the end. Not that those entries were so much before the diminishmentosity, which I suppose makes it worse, from my point of view. Those notes served their purpose, and I wouldn’t have gone back to them, if it weren’t for the kids and their lousy search skillz, and going back to them hasn’t been a matter of pride (there are posts of mine I’m proud of, you know, but the Book Reports are mostly filler), which affects my attitude.

And then there’s the whole thing about the audience for the blog in general, a matter on which YHB is still ambivalent. On the one hand, I am actually quite pleased that this Tohu Bohu shows up on the front page of some searches with some fairly common words. On the other hand, you know, ambivalent. I want the kids off my lawn, unless they are good kids, who are welcome to play ball on my lawn and can use my lawn darts (the safe kind). I gripe about the sparsity of comments, but then I get comments and gripe about the quality of them. With each of these notes, I worry whether I will get more of them. And worrying? takes away from the fun of the whole blogging thing.

And, in fact, if I thought that deleting them would lead to less worrying about them, I would probably just delete them. But I can’t decide that without worrying about it a lot more.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

October 31, 2009

Looking Down

OK, so y’all know that I am a circulation clerk at an academic library, right? As such, part of my job—most of my job, really—is supervising college kids who are working five or eight hours a week for pocket money. This is fine; it’s easy work, and I’m pretty good at it. The job is, essentially, being a visible grown-up. There’s a good deal of training and manual-writing, which I can do, and a fair amount of basic circ-work, checking in and out and shelving and so on, but mostly, I am making sure that the young persons show up and do what they are supposed to do. Yes? And provide a grown-up presence in the library, in case that is necessary.

The grown-up presence is really my job. All I have to do, most of the time, is walk around, wear a necktie, and have gray in my hair. The student workers will not be as inclined to chat with their friends and romantic interests if I am nearby, or to slang each other, or ignore the desk. I rarely have to ask them to stop doing something inappropriate; I do my work by just being there. I am Uncle Supervisor. This is excellent work for me, because I do not secretly want to be twenty again, or to join in the lives of the students. I don’t listen to their music or watch their television shows (which aren’t usually on television); I don’t dress like them or speak like them, and I don’t have a facebook account.

I also don’t make the hiring and firing decisions, which is nice for me. The people who do make those decisions consult with me, and I am carefully noncommittal. I have, on a couple of occasions, confirmed that a student will not be missed; I have much more rarely stood up for a student who I think is potentially a good worker. The person who does the hiring prefers, on the whole, to hire women than men, I think on the reasonable grounds that college-age women are more likely to be steady and responsible than college-age men. I think this is true in general for our university’s students, but fails to take into account that a young woman in her sophomore year is likely to remain at her level of maturity for another year, while a young fellow is fairly likely to learn about buckling down right about then, even after a freshman year of slack. But my point here (and I’m slowly getting to it) is that while I am the supervisor on shift, I am not the Head of Department; the big decisions and the discipline are done elsewhere, with minor input from me and the other supervisors. I am in between.

This all means that I am friendly with the students without being friends with them. They know a little about my life (that I am married and have children, that I act in community theater) and I know a little about theirs (where they are from, their field of study), and perhaps we discuss books or art, but I don’t, for instance, know about their romantic lives, or their fights with roommates, or their finances. Oh, sometimes I wind up finding out about some of that, against my will, but on the whole, I keep my nose out of their business. Yes? Clear? Now the tricky bit.

We have a student, let’s call her, oh, you think of a name. Rachel. How about Rachel? We don’t have a Rachel at present. OK, we have a student worker who we’re calling Rachel, who seems to be fairly bright, helpful, pleasant, prompt, all that good stuff. No problems, as far as I know. Our working hours overlap only a little bit; most of her hours she has a different supervisor, but I do see her at least briefly twice a week, and then of course on occasion in the library when she isn’t working for us but for her profs. I have had a few conversations with her, but I would say I know her even more distantly than many of the other student workers. And I certainly have no complaints about her work, which I haven’t seen, for the most part.

I have a complaint about her clothing.

And I should say—I don’t even have a complaint about her clothing, as such. I mean, I am not complaining.

Rachel has a large and well-formed bosom. I have seen pretty much all of it at this point, and I do have to say I’m impressed. It’s not, you know, astonishing. Her breasts are not the biggest of all our student workers; I would guess Rachel has a C-cup, and we have a couple of workers in the double-D region. And all of the young women wear clothes I consider inappropriately revealing. Another of our workers, let’s call her Joan, has an absolutely tremendous bosom, real enter-the-room-before-she-does figure, and about a yard of décolletage most days, and if I were her father, I would prefer she wear high-necked stuff, but she doesn’t, and that’s her business. But Rachel’s outfits show a difference in degree that I think is a difference in kind. This is less like peeking and more like being flashed.

You know about cleavage—there’s the cleavage that is a vertical line, and there’s the cleavage that’s more of a V, and there’s the cleavage which is actually two lines? Where you can see the skin between the breasts? Sometimes women with small breasts have that, but for a C-cup, it usually requires either very good undergarments or really remarkable breasts. Or low gravity, I would guess. Anyway, what I’m saying, with Rachel, there’s the skin between the breasts, the underside of the breasts, and part of the nipple.

Now, when I say, above, that being Old Guy on Duty is excellent work for me, the one thing that I do worry about in that capacity is that I am the kind of Old Guy who likes to look down the shirts of young women. I attempt to do so discreetly. I mean, in addition to our workers, there are the students and faculty; the job does require a fair amount of people handing me books over a counter, which is a terrible temptation for a very susceptible circulation clerk. I am rather afraid of developing a reputation as a Creepy Old Guy, rather than an Avuncular Old Guy, and I hope I have avoided that so far. I am also afraid of actually being a Creepy Old Guy, in the sense that I don’t want to creep these young women out. Partially because of ego of my own, and partially (I insist) that I really do believe that everybody has a right to a workplace that doesn’t creep them out. I hope that my safely-married status is comforting; I am the most married man in the world, as people who get to know me quickly figure out. I haven’t made a pass at a woman other than my Best Reader since I was a college kid myself, working at the circulation desk. I don’t want to do anything with these young women other than look at them on occasion, to the extent that I can do so without creeping them out.

All of which is to admit that I do look down the shirts of my inappropriately-dressed underlings, but I don’t stare open-mouthed, drool running down my chin. I look our employees in the eye when I speak to them, and I don’t make up tasks for them that involve a lot of bending at the waist. You know? I am creepy, but I try to keep it within bounds.

With Rachel, however,it is extremely difficult not to stare. In fact, I wind up staying further away from her, looking away when talking to her, and generally trying like hell not to look down her shirt, because I don’t think I can do it discreetly. While, of course, thinking about it and, particularly when she enters the library, taking a quick look.

Now. On the one hand, I do think it’s her business; she is neither so stupid or so nearsided that she is unaware that she is showing off, and I actually support her in her right to so choose. On the other, I think it’s a minor mistake—I doubt she realizes that it’s not just the hunky guys in her classes but the creepy middle-aged staff and faculty who are getting an eyeful of skin. Perhaps she does, and either (a) she thinks it’s a fair tradeoff, or (2) she likes showing off to creepy middle-aged people. I have no idea.

The difficulty for me is that as her supervisor, I feel that it would be a good idea if someone told her that she shouldn’t flaunt her bosom quite so much whilst working. Or at least if someone made it clear that it might very well make other people uncomfortable, and that it would be better to use some discretion herself in the interests of workplace amity and so on. But I don’t want to tell her myself. I can’t imagine that conversation going well at all. (Rachel, if I could just have a moment of your time, I just wanted to say I’ve been looking down your shirt, and—) Nor, honestly, do I feel like a conversation between YHB and the other supervisory staff would be enjoyable and free from awkwardness. (Can you tell Rachel to cover her damned tits already?) I think, in point of fact, that any such conversation would be likelier to increase the difficulty of the workplace rather than decrease it.

And, just to embarrass myself further (we’re all friends here, right? We didn’t leave the window open, did we?) I am not altogether sure that want the final resolution of the matter to be that Rachel dresses more sensibly. I mean, yes, it would make things easier for me, but then, you know, in a few semesters she’ll be gone, and I will have an amusing memory, and in the meantime, she really does have a great rack. But when the person who makes the schedule starts asking about next semester, I don’t exactly know how to say I’d like to have Rachel arrive just as I am leaving, please, so I can get one good look without having to deal with the consequences.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

October 15, 2009

Walk away and come back to it later

Your Humble Blogger has started doing crosswords again. I go through phases with crosswords: I go years without the slightest urge to do one, and then I start doing them every day, or maybe two or three a day, for a few weeks, and then I’m all done for another few years. This time is different; I added the goofy NYT crossword widget to my Google page, which gives me only one puzzle a week, and that’s all I’m doing.

I have never been particularly good at crosswords. I mean, by good-at-crosswords standards. I know the general standard is by NYT day-of-the-week, with Monday being easiest and Saturday hardest (if I am remembering correctly); crossword solvers can describe themselves as being Thursday-level or Wednesday-level, depending on which day they have to really start thinking about the puzzle rather than just filling in the little boxes. The ones the NYT is making available vary in difficulty, and they give the date of publication, so I could figure out the day of the week, but I don’t. Generally, though, I find them moderately time-consuming. I can’t just whip through them, but neither do I generally leave anything blank, or at any rate, not more than a square or two.

What I wanted to write about, though, was the odd thing that happens with puzzles, that I experience with crosswords because those are the ones I do, but I understand is a general phenomenon. I get stuck, I walk away from the puzzle, and then I come back the next day and find a bunch of stuff that seems really easy, and I can’t figure out why I was stuck. I’m not talking about the thing where you get two or three clues you didn’t get before, and that gives you a long one, and then you’ve broken the back of the puzzle. No, I’m talking about the ones you were staring at, had no idea about, and then without getting any new letters, the answers suddenly become obvious.

You all have this, right? About crosswords, or sodoko, or rebussess’s, or videogames, or coding, or carpentry, or whatever you work on. It’s so common that I don’t think I’ve ever really questioned it before. Of course, if you are trying to work something out, and you are stuck, you walk away from it for a while, and then come back with fresh eyes. Everyone knows that.

But… why? Why would that work? I mean, the synapses aren’t, you know, actually wearing grooves in the wrong places in the brain. That’s a metaphor. There’s no evolutionary benefit to humans developing an inability to solve crossword puzzles on one go, but an ability to get inspiration on a second look. The brain isn’t a magic eight-ball that needs shaking up to get a good chance at a positive answer, or a deck of cards that has to be shuffled to prevent the patterns from the previous deal affecting the next one. You aren’t actually changing the brain, physically, at all. Right? You are just walking away and coming back.

I don’t mean to in any way denigrate the experience, or the brain for that matter. It’s really cool that I can think about other things and then come back to a problem and have a chance at improving my thinking about it. It just seems—well, if you were designing human brain function, Gentle Reader, is that the sort of feature you would select?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

September 26, 2009

For the Sake of Zion, vaddevah dat means

So my Perfect Non-Reader, now being a big third-grade kid, has progressed to the next level of Hebrew School. They are finally teaching her the aleph-bet with some seriousness, and they are teaching her the liturgical structure of the service, and they are brainwashing her with Zionism.

They gave her, in that first week of classes, a very odd thing: it’s a page out of For the Sake of Zion: Pride and Strength Through Knowledge, by Tuvia Book. This is a work specifically and explicitly devoted to indoctrinating passion for Zion. And it’s aimed at high-school students and college kids. From the press release:

Once Jewish students leave the protective bubble of school, home or intimate social group and enter the “real world” of a mixed college campus, sometimes hostile to Jews and Zionism, they often find themselves uncomfortable, on the defensive and unable to speak about Israel in partbecause they lack the passion for Zion.

In order to respond effectively with a sense of self-respect and to be proactive, students need a sense of commitment and pride, as well as knowledge and tools.

The sheet they gave the kids is a list of statements, and a space to respond whether the reader agrees or disagrees (on an A-E scale, oddly enough). I’m going to type in the whole thing, because—well, because I find it interesting and a trifle disturbing.

  • The Jews are a nation like the French or the Germans.
  • The Jews are a religious group like Muslims or Christians.
  • All Jews should live in Israel.
  • Jewish life in the Diaspora is vital to the continuation of the Jewish people.
  • Jewish life in the Diaspora can never be fully safe or satisfying.
  • Self-determination is the basic right of all peoples.
  • The Jewish claim for national independence is based on Divine promise as recorded in the Torah.
  • The Jewish people have an absolute and singular right to the Land of Israel as their national homeland.
  • The Land of Israel is the national homeland of both the Jewish and the Palestinian Arab people.
  • The State of Israel should be a model of Western liberal democracy.
  • The Torah is the national constitution of the Jewish people and should be the national constitution of the State of Israel.
  • The State of Israel belongs to the entire Jewish people.
  • The State of Israel belongs to the citizens of the State.
  • Israel is primarily a refuge for Jews fleeing oppression and a response to anti-Semitism.
  • Israel is primarily a creative expression of the Jewish people’s will to be an independent community.
  • All citizens of the State of Israel, regardless of religion or national-cultural identity, should share the same rights and privileges.
  • Zionism demands personal fulfillment through Aliyah.
  • Any support of Israel is Zionism.
  • Zionism does not end with Aliyah, but continues through personal work to create a better society in Israel.
  • A person living in Israel has to serve in the IDF to be considered a Zionist.

Well, now. As a conversation-kicker for grupps, or perhaps even more so for college kids, there’s a lot there. I could probably write a note about each of those twenty items (or more accurately, I could begin the project and then peter out after eight or so, despite having plenty to say about the rest). If we all (Gentle Readers and myself) just did the A-E response that the worksheet calls for would generate a wide range of responses. Giving it to a bunch of eight-year-old kids— My Perfect Non-Reader has an immense vocabulary, and I think is able to more or less understand the sentences and what they mean. Or, I should say, what they mean on the simplest level; I don’t claim to fully understand what Self-determination is the basic right of all peoples means, or what national independence means, or personal fulfillment or Western liberal democracy, for that matter. These are not well-defined terms. That doesn’t mean that they have no meaning, or that they can’t be used to communicate effectively, just that there is a limit to the extent that I am willing to say that I understand them. But that limit is very different from the limit experienced by an eight-year-old, who may or may not know what, for instance, the word refuge means. My Perfect Non-Reader does know that word, and its relation to refugee, because her parents are that way.

So I think her trouble is the greater one, close to the one that I have with the list. On the other hand, I have had lots of these conversations before. I have some experience with the tricky parts. It’s fairly easy for me to say it’s more complicated than that to pretty much anybody. I’m thinking not so much for an eight-year-old in class.

And then there’s this: I am an anti-Zionist myself, in the sense that I think Zionism was an error, although I have no solution to offer myself. Certainly I don’t think that immediate abolition of the State of Israel is a good solution, but given a range of solutions, I would rather work toward a future without a Jewish State, if that could be done without making things worse for lots of individual people. It’s hard to see how that would happen. So in terms of practical policy preferences, I am probably in line with, oh, J Street, despite their “support [for] Israel and its desire for security as the Jewish homeland”. I desire security for Jews, both in the Holy Land and elsewhere, but I do not in principle support the State’s desire for security as the Jewish homeland. But then here I’m reminded of the book-dialogue between Michael Lerner and Cornel West, when they are talking about Zionism, and it turns out that neither of them believe in the nation-state as such, so of course the whole concept of Zionism is suspect. I, too, have trouble with the idea of the nation-state, and that puts me in the corner with the guys with the funny haircuts who make trouble, but has almost nothing to do with anything practical.

But practically speaking, I am a Diaspora Jew. I identify myself as a Diaspora Jew, and I practice Diaspora Judaism. When we discuss Jewish matters (which happens fairly often around the house, as you can guess), I respond as a Diaspora Jew. And as an American. And that rubs off. My Perfect Non-Reader filled out this page as a Diaspora Jew, and as an anti-Zionist, to boot. I suspect that she was one of the few people to strongly disagree with the absolute and singular right stuff and give a shrug of a C to The State of Israel belongs to the entire Jewish people. Not that I would fill the paper out exactly the way she did, but on the whole, she wrote a paper as YHB’s daughter.

And that worries me. Not, in this instance, because I am worried about my own indoctrination, pace Akabya b. Mahaleel. But because I think it will be difficult and unpleasant for her to hold such unpopular views. Because she will be torn between loyalty to her Old Dad, who she loves (thank the Divine, although I embarrass her so) and respect for her teacher and the respect of her classmates. This is not like growing up a Yankee fan’s son in Boston. This is like that kid whose dad sued to have the Pledge of Allegiance returned to its original secular text.

I grew up in a New York Liberal Jewish household in a Southwestern town. My dad remains an old Trotskyite, at heart. When the Soviet Union fell apart, I was in college, and at that point I heard echoed in my community his response that this was the best possible news for advancing socialism. But when I was in high school and we read Animal Farm, I caused a major ruckus by making a similar point about Marx and Stalin. And that was high school. When I was Brynnen’s age, more or less, Jimmy Carter was running for President, and I was aware that our household was an Democratic island in a sea of Republicans. I heard dozens of Jimmy Carter jokes from my classmates. Not that I cared, particularly, about politics at the time. And I associated the political thing with the religious thing; we were supposed to be outsiders, after all.

Now I live in a town with seven synagogues. The local A&P put out a huge display of round challah right by the entrance last week, together with raisins, apricots, figs and those sticky nut-honey things that the Sephardim eat. And on the right day, too. The schools are closed on Monday for the Yom, not particularly out of sensitivity but out of logistical necessity, with so many students and teachers out. Being a Jew is not being an outsider in this town, and I am reminded almost every week of how different that is from my own childhood.

And yet, it seems, I am bringing my daughter into an outsider status of her own. I am, how do you say, conflicted about this. I am proud of her and worried about her. I feel guilty for having put her in this position, and I feel good about having protected her against the indoctrination I disagree with. I am frustrated by the whole weight of history that has made it seem almost reasonable for my shul to indoctrinate the kids in their school in Zionism, even while I think it’s a wrong-headed idea. And I want, in the words of the press release for that book, for my Perfect Non-Reader to respond effectively with a sense of self-respect and to be proactive, drawing on a sense of commitment and pride, as well as knowledge and tools. Only, I think I want her to do it in 5777, not this year.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

September 24, 2009

Avarice, Anger, Sloth, Gluttony, Secrecy, Mink and Palmer

So Your Humble Blogger was washing dishes, as happens not infrequently, and as a not infrequent mental accompaniment to the dishwashing, was composing a possible note for this Tohu Bohu. It was a Days of Awe note, full of that combination of insight and whimsy—well, anyway. I had come to that part of the bit where I list the Seven Deadly sins, and I was preparing to slip in a reference to the great Woody Allen Vodka Ad bit and sneak in the Seven Dwarfs instead.

Or, rather, do that other bit I do, where I start out with the Disney Canonical Seven Dwarfs and end up off track a bit. It’s surprising how often I get a chance to do it, although of course the ability and willingness to rattle off the names of the Seven Dwarves does tend to skew conversations into paths that give one the opportunity to show off such an ability, just as, I imagine, people who do not know the first ten digits of pi rarely find themselves in conversations where one might be able to slip those numerals in to great effect.

Anyway, as I say, what I actually do is not name the Seven Dwarfs but (and this is a tone of voice thing, so you have to imagine YHB doing it deadpan and with total confidence) instead list off Happy, Sleepy, Grumpy, Dopey, Sleazy, Jumpy and Mike. It’s the Mike that amuses me so. I mean, the rhythm of the actual last three (Sneezy, Bashful and Doc) is so great, and Mike is (to my ears) just the right distance from Doc—not so close that you think it’s correct, and not so far off that it makes no sense. And I love the idea that everybody gets a descriptive name and one guy is just named Mike. Or that somebody (notionally YHB) really believes that one of them is called Mike.

Actually, the whole thing started when I lived in Ess Eff and I had a good friend who worked for a law firm (cum lobbying firm) I referred to as Thelen, Marrin, Johnson, Bridges, Sleazy, Jumpy and Mike. All those trochees. They are now just Thelen LLP, presumably because after all the mergers they blew the trochee thing, being at that point Thelen, Marrin, Johnson, Bridges, Reid, Priest, Berlack, Israels, Liberman, Pinsent and Masons. Which is a trifle unwieldy, and you can see why they went with the short version. The short, unfunny version. Not that law firms really need to think about maximizing the hilarity potential of their corporate identity.

But the hilarity potential of misnaming the Seven Dwarfs is clearly something that does require serious thought here in this Tohu Bohu. Because, frankly, I am not altogether satisfied. For one thing, I have long thought that substituting sleazy for sneezy is a bit obvious, a bit adolescent. Not unfunny, and I think it is important for the first not-quite-correct name to be very close, which that does accomplish. But better can be achieved, I think. Perhaps with incongruity: something like Happy, Sleepy, Sneezy, Dopey, Jumpy, Lefty and Mike. Or going further afield: Happy, Sleepy, Grumpy, Dopey, Lefty, One-Eye and Mike. I do like the idea of one of the dwarfs being called One-Eye, as a reference to an obscure David Edgar play called Ball Boys I am very fond of, and the combination of Lefty and One-Eye to me sounds very English-thug, which is a good combination with Disney Dwarfs, but then Mike is no longer funny, being neither a Dwarf of a Goon. Happy, Sleepy, Grumpy, Dopey, Lefty, One-Eye and Spike? Happy, Sleepy, Grumpy, Dopey, Lefty, One-Eye and Jock? Happy, Sleepy, Grumpy, Dopey, Lefty, One-Eye and Brick? Happy, Sleepy, Grumpy, Dopey, Duffy, Solly and MacClanahan?

Yes, this is the sort of thing Your Humble Blogger spends a lot of time thinking about.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

September 14, 2009

The first spot on the Anti-Monopoly board

Your Humble Blogger wrote a page analysing the manner in which Left Blogovia became dominated, largely, by people who are passionate in their opposition to the Republican Party (quite rightly in my view) and deeply suspicious of the Democratic Party for being pro-business and “moderate” without being very far to the left of center on the actual substance of policy. It was a very dull post. I didn’t finish it.

Yes, I’ve been a lousy blogger lately. Sorry about that. Lost the mojo, somehow.

I will try to recover, but it will likely be slow. Well, and we’re off-book next week, so I should be working on my lines, anyway.

In the meantime, if anybody wants an unused Digression on the way support for single-payer health insurance is the hobby-horse of cranks of the left, while opposition to single-payer unemployment insurance is not even audible amongst the hard-core anti-government tea-dumpers on the Right, it is available. And may yet turn up in a note in the next few weeks. Reuse, recycle, repurpose, retrain, relax, relent, research, remark, ricola. Repeat.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

August 5, 2009

Grass or Greens?

YHB pulling weeds

A book called Edible Estates : attack on the front lawn crossed YHB’s path yesterday. Last night I ate some extraordinarily tasty squash, grown in our back yard and grilled by our next-door neighbor. And this morning I went out and mowed the lawn in two hundred degree heat (with five hundred percent humidity). All of which got me to thinking about this idea of getting rid of the grass and devoting the whole of our (tiny) yard to vegetables and flowers.

Not, you understand, that I am actually planning on doing anything about it. The yard, and particularly the gardens, are my Best Reader’s territory. I grew up in the desert. I lend a hand, here and there, but I don’t make the decisions. At the moment, we have a few small beds for veggies, and the rest is lawn.

Regular Labor:

  • Lawn: Mowing, dandelion-pulling, nettle-pulling
  • Veggies: weeding, harvesting, watering

Annual Labor:

  • Lawn: Not a lot.
  • Veggies: Purchasing new plants/seeds and soil, planting, mulching

Money:

  • Lawn: occasional mower sharpening or repair.
  • Veggies: Large initial expense for plants, but then reduced expense for veggies at the store.

You know, for kids!:

  • Lawn: running, jumping, playing catch, kicking a ball around
  • Veggies: education, nutrition

It’s all about YHB:

  • Lawn: I grew up with a lawn, even in the desert. It seems natural.
  • Veggies: Yum, plus it’s fun to watch them grow.

I should also note that where the regular labor of a lawn can be replaced with money outlay, that’s less true of the regular labor of a veggie garden, until either the Perfect Non-Reader or a neighborhood kid can be given that those tasks. At the moment, with our lives how they are, we don’t want to spend money on the outdoors, but as we get older, our interest in avoiding the trowel or mower may increase. Also, the nearest public park/playground is far enough away that a parent would have to go with children for quite a few years yet; it’s walking distance, but across major streets.

What do y’all do, those of you who have control over an outdoor patch near where you live?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

July 31, 2009

5K!

Five Thousand Comments!

That’s three zeroes, preceded by a five. That’s a lot of comments. I mean, for some guy with a blog. There were probably five thousand comments over on the McCovey Chronicles in one evening a couple of weeks ago. Atrios probably gets five thousand comments on a slow afternoon. I’ve got them slowly over twenty-three hundred days. And I wrote a lot of them myself. I don’t know how many; a simple search seems to break the whole system down. Phooey. Anyway, although five thousand is a good round number, it’s a bit misleading, as (a) there are at least half-a-dozen comments included in there that are double posts or spam and should be removed, and (2) there may have been some proper comments inadvertently deleted along the line. So although I was considering setting off bells when that five thousandth comment came in, and then decorating that special comment with colors and stars and the dancing baby animated gif, on second thought, not so much. In fact, I wound up waiting for another dozen comments or so before writing this up.

Because although the Comment Milestone is terrific, and it actually means a lot to YHB (far more than it should, probably, but then I’ve been watching the counter tick over for hundreds of comments now, and then there was the whole business where it spent a week going over 5,000 with spam and then going back down under when I deleted the spam, which, I can tell you, added so much to the experience), I decided some years ago that I didn’t want to go for quantity, what with the quality being so good. And I have to admit, for some reason we all had time, back in those days, for good long comment conversations, such as the Conservative Tenets series, particularly Eight and Ten or the thread on More Notes from Union Meetings.

Oh, while I’m at it, here are a few other threads that make me happy: Not very zippy, after all, President Bush Reaffirms Resolve to War on Terror, Iraq and Afghanistan, and The death business. Or How could anyone… (aka the New Strunk and White’s), What Voters Want or Mais Non, Mais Non (doot-doo de-doot doo). Or Understanding, validating, disagreeing. Or Haftorah Bo.

And I really should do more quizzes and contests, because Hint: Not the Hippopatamus wound up with a really interesting thread, and I vastly enjoyed Online Encore. They do require some work on my part, though.

Well, anyway. The point is just that I am very grateful to you, Gentle Readers all, for all the comments over the years. Thank you.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

July 15, 2009

Mmmmm, spam.

Sorry about the lapse in posting lately. There has been a combination of factors, as is usually the case when I don’t post for several days. One major factor, happily, is that we have houseguests, who are lovely and are taking up large chunks of time. Another, less happily, is that my employer has this week gone to a new controlling software program, which has been substantially less problematic than I expected it to be, but still has taken concentration and effort that has effectively ruled out tippity-tapping in a word processor for later insertion into the Tohu Bohu. And another, very crankily, is that there have been just hundreds and hundreds of spam comments over the last several days, so when YHB visits the controls, it’s all about the spam-killing.

I had gone through a chunk of time where my spam filters weren’t working at all, and I was able to get them working, so for the last several weeks, it was catching spam and not putting it on the web. And when I did get a bunch, I could spot the cues and tell the filter to stop any more of them, and it worked, and that was a Good Thing. My Gracious Host, Jed, helped with that, and it was working, and I was happy, happy, happy.

And then… these comments have been coming in with, as far as I can tell, random combinations of letters (and not long strings, either) as the email, URL and content. They are not from the same IP address, and they do not have any links within the body of the spam. There are no words or recognizable (and repeated) word-like things to alert a filter. And they have been coming more or less every five minutes for several days. If I am off-line for a while, and I often am, I come back to discover dozens of comments that have been published and are not only crudding up the Tohu Bohu but are bloating my aggregator—and your aggregator, too, if you are clever enough to be subscribed to the comment feed. It makes me cranky, so cranky. And I don’t like being cranky.

And, er, I am exaggerating a bit. I mean, it’s been three days, and a total of two hundred or so spam comments. A lot, and in my aggregator I get less than a hundred proper items a day, so adding another fifty spam items makes my aggregator useless as an aggregator, but not every five minutes, which would be, over forty-eight hours, let me see, twelve eights is sixteen and eighty, and four twelves is forty eight, which is, don’t tell me, carry the one, fifty and fourteen, a hundred and twelve, it would be five hundred and sixty-sumpin’ spam comments, when in fact, I had only a third of that. Not that much, really.

But still making me cranky.

So what I’ve done, for the moment, is put a hold on all incoming comments. So when you post, it’ll go to that famous moderation cue, and I will make it visible just as soon as I can distinguish it from the spam. Which should be easy, unless you are posting random combinations of letters. In which case, curse you (shakes fist)!

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

June 20, 2009

Ten Good Years

Where were you, Gentle Reader, ten years ago today?

Most of you were helping me get married.

Well, many of you. I don’t know how many Gentle Readers there actually are, but of those who comment, now and then, I’m pretty sure more than half were in that room. Not that I remember it, but my Best Reader and I were looking at the pictures this morning, and there you were. You seem to have been having a good time.

So do I. Although, as I say, I don’t remember much of it. We lit a candle for unity and snuffed out our individual lives; I remember that. I remember that it was raining, and then it wasn’t, and then it was again; we moved the reception inside and seemed to continue having a good time. My Best Reader was beautiful; I remember that, but it was nice to see it in the photographs. And y’all were young. So young.

For those of you who weren’t there at the time, well, I’m sorry you missed it. We had funeral parlor fans printed up, for people to wave; they weren’t needed for the heat, in the event, but people amused themselves with them anyway. There were children running around, evidently; they seem very small in the photographs, almost unrecognizable from the big kids I know. The cake was pretty, and also tasty to the best of my recollection, and it’s too bad that Sweet Daddy Bakery (in lovely Wayne, PA) is no longer around. And there were lots and lots and lots of roses.

The thing about this moment, ten years (give or take an hour) from signing the ketubah and being pronounced man and wife by a nice old Marryin’ Sam, is that for all it’s a magnificent anniversary, well worth remembering, celebrating and commemorating, it is just a moment. It did, for a long time, divide our lives together into before the wedding and after the wedding. One of those pivots, it looked like, a major landmark, when Everything Changes. Now, having spent some time this morning looking at the photos, and some more time, since the box was open, looking at some other photos, it looks less like that. Oh, it’s a Big Deal, don’t get me wrong. But it’s possible for me to look at a photo of my Best Reader and not know whether it was from Before or After the wedding. Or, particularly, care. We have had ten good years of marriage. Before that, we had eight good years of cohabitation, and before that four good years of friendship.

And the moment, thinking about it, that Everything Changed (or rather, one of them, since the most Changy of the moments was when we bumped up a generation and started being parents)— the moment that Everything Changed was not the moment that we exchanged promises and become husband and wife, in the eyes of the state, our family and friends, and (one hopes) the Divine, but some earlier moment when we realized that we wanted to make those promises. And fulfill them. Which, thank the Divine, we are still working on.

Then why this mawkish and unusually personal blog note? Because, Gentle Reader, while that earlier moment may have been the real moment when Everything Changed, it was not the moment for publicly commemorating that change. That was ten years ago, more or less now. I think; I don’t really remember. But there are pictures.

And then, this moment is another moment for that public commemoration. And, just as ten years ago, it required a room full of family and friends to properly do the job, I was thinking that this morning it requires you, Gentle Reader, whether you were there at the time or not, to make this a commemoration of that moment when we exchanged the vows, of the earlier moment when we chose to do so, and of all the time since that we’ve been working at them.

And of all the time ahead for working at them some more. We still, my Best Reader and I, propose marriage to each other. Probably three or four times a week. Sometimes, and don’t tell anyone this, we dance, in the kitchen, while the kids are wrecking the living room.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

June 4, 2009

Optimism, Pessimism, Semism

My Gracious Host’s recent post about Worry, hope, and jinxing things gives me a spur to write about my own combination of optimism and pessimism. That isn’t exactly what the post is about, but I have been known to go off on my own tangents before.

You know the half-glass of water? It’s difficult for me to describe myself as either an optimist or a pessimist; I tend to say that the glass is half-empty, but that it’s probably potable water, good to drink. You know? My usual formula is that I tend to think that the worst will happen, but that it won’t turn out to be so bad, after all. My recent travel experience makes a story worth telling about that attitude.

We were changing planes in Chicago.

No, at Midway, but still. Southwest, the mad scramble for seats, but we had A group tickets. For those who haven’t done the Southwest thing, they don’t have assigned seating, but ticketholders can go on-line twenty-fours before departure time and get a group assignment. Group A boards first, then Group B, and so on. Within each group, there are numbers, so the holder of A-15 will in theory board fifteenth of all, and it’s better to have B-5 than B-41. Your chances of getting the seat you want, or if you are traveling in a group the seat configuration you want, are dependent on getting a good assignment and on the people in front of you wanting different seats. And, of course, if you don’t show up in time to board with the A group, having an A assignment is worth bupkess.

Well, if that’s all clear, then follow me further: we are connecting at Midway with a short layover of, say, forty-five minutes. The plane we were on is twenty minutes late boarding, and then backed up on the runway, so it becomes clear that we are likely to be something like an hour late coming in to Chicago. I become convinced, absolutely convinced, that we will miss our plane. Because, you know, we are going to arrive in Chicago after the scheduled departure time. So. We’ll miss our plane. Pessimism.

On the other hand, I figured there would be another plane to Hartford that night, or if not, then they would put us up at a hotel for free for a night. Either way, not really a problem. I mean, an annoyance, but nobody was meeting us, and it was on the way back, so it wasn’t cutting into our visiting time. So I was pessimistic about catching our plane, but optimistic about our evening and night.

Then I said to my Best Reader, you know, says I, the worst thing would be to get to the airport with two minutes to get to the other gate, have to race through the airport and then find it all filled up so we wouldn’t get seats together. Meaning, Gentle Reader, to put in perspective the annoyance of missing the plane entirely. I expected the evening to contain a moderately unpleasant discussion with an overworked gate agent, an hour and a half to kill in the airport, and then a late flight home. Not so bad. Optimism.

Of course, what happened was that the Hartford-bound airplane was also delayed, so our plane pulled into the gate with two minutes to get to the other gate, and we had to race through the airport and then find the plane was all filled up so there were no seats together. There were ten or so middle seats empty; all the aisle and window seats were taken. Some nice chap gave up an aisle seat so that my Best Reader could sit with the Youngest Member; YHB sat behind my Perfect Non-Reader across the aisle. And it was fine.

Of course, in a situation like that, there is no way that the luggage made it from one plane to another like that, right? I said as much, on the plane, and then again whilst waiting at the baggage carousel. Pessimist, me. On the other hand, we were on our way home, and there wasn’t anything in our checked luggage that we desperately needed overnight. In fact, it would be slightly more convenient to have the bags fail to show up and then have the airline drive them to the house the next day. Or the day after. I mean, there’s the whole filling out forms, I would guess, and a conversation with an overworked agent, but on the other hand I wouldn’t have to schlepp the bags to the car.

I’m not sure whether it counts as optimism or pessimism. I mean, an optimist would believe that the bags would be on the plane, that we’d catch our plane, that we’ll stop global warming, that we’ll stay out of a major Depression, that we’ll have good weather on the night of the School Fair. A pessimist would believe that the bags were permanently lost, that we’d be stranded in Chicago, that global warming will lead to hundreds of refugees from drowned cities fighting over a diminished supply of food, that by next winter the frozen bodies of the homeless will be stacked up like unaffordable cordwood, and that the School Fair will be miserable whether it rains or not. I tend to think that our bags will come home to us wagging their tails behind them, that there will be another flight home or else a reasonably comfortable hotel room, that some particularly clever people will find a way to house the refugees and feed them, sparking not violence but fascinating new cultural friction, and that the millions of jobless and homeless will find fulfilling work, productive and creative and lasting. And so on.

Any attempt to reconcile this fence-straddling attitude with my attitude toward John Henry will be doomed to failure. But the failure won’t be that bad…

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

May 18, 2009

Why? And for what reason? And wherefore?

I had meant to respond, ages ago, to a question Matt H. asked in the comments to a note almost a month ago. Since I never did respond, rather than just ignoring it, I’ll put it up here in a new note, particularly as I don’t have any real inspiration for writing just now, and don’t feel like doing another damned Book Report.

What is it that makes you in favor (apparently) of abolishing tenure, where I’m leery of it; and I want term limits for Senators, which concept you (V) previously have expressed the leer thereof?

First of all, I’m going to do the web thing where I dismiss the question: The current situation with Senators, which can roughly be described as renewable six-year contracts with the understanding that almost all the incumbents will be renewed in their positions, is what I would imagine replacing the current tenure system, if the tenure system were to be replaced. I would be against limiting the professor to a particular number of renewals at a particular institution; I would be against granting Senators life appointments. So there’s that. And besides that, I wouldn’t describe myself as in favor of abolishing tenure so much as strongly ambivalent about tenure; if I could snap my fingers and make that policy change, I don’t know that I would do it. And I am less leery about term limits than I was; if I could snap my fingers and institute a, say, four-term limit for the Senate, I don’t know that I wouldn’t. Although I would prefer to use that finger-snapping business as leverage for other changes that I think are more valuable, but that’s where the leer comes in, right?

But I don’t think Matt was getting at the specific differences in circumstances and policies. I think he’s looking at our instincts when it comes to job protection, democracy, conservativism (in the sense of preserving What Is), and the levels of leeriness in suggesting changes. Essentially, we both look at the tenure situation and see positives and negatives, and he is leery of change where I am willing to chance it; we both look at the Senate and see positives and negatives, and I am leery of change where he is willing to chance it. It’s not risk-aversion, it’s not the conservative temperament, and I’d be willing to suggest that it isn’t really the policy differences in the matter (much as I would be willing to argue that I am correct in both of my positions). So what is it?

Partially, of course, it’s that my Best Reader is at the moment Junior Faculty. Y’all know the joke about the scholar that has a heart attack and dies at the very moment the hood is placed over his head conferring the Ph.D.? At the gate of the Afterlife, he is told that while of course had he continued in his academic career, he would have been dispatched to the Bad Place, but since he expired just at the moment, they weren’t sure what to do with him. Eventually, he is told that he will have to choose his ultimate destination. Choose? he asks. I mean, isn’t it obvious? No, he is told, he should visit both and see which he prefers. So up he goes on a visitor’s pass, and it’s very nice. Harps, hosannahs, haloes. You know, nice. Not real exciting, but nice. And then he goes to the other place, again on a visitor’s pass, and you know what? It’s wonderful. It’s like the ultimate college, and the library? It has everything, everything ever written and a lot of stuff that was never published, and even more, there are all the great scholars and academicians, from his own advisor’s advisor’s advisor all the way back to Plato, and all the stuff they’ve been working on since passing to the other side. And they all sit around and talk about the work. And they are interested in his work, too, and have suggestions for collaboration and for resources he could use, and all of these conversations are over the most fantastic meal he’s ever had, eating and drinking and the life of the mind and when he is back at the gate turning in his visitor’s pass, he says I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I’d like to go to Hell, please. Well, there’s this, like, ultimate thunderclap, and blam-blam-blam there’s our deceased young friend in Hell, with torment, unspeakable torment, and flames, and ice, and demons jeering at him, and the howls of damned souls, and all of that, and he cries out in agony, he cries out Where is the library? Where is the meat and drink? Where are my colleagues? This is not what I was shown! and the voice that answers him says that was the interview, fool. Now you are junior faculty.

Which, you know, funny. But.

I’m saying that the problems with faculty tenure are connected to problems in my own daily life. I’m actually experiencing them. So, naturally, when I’m totting up costs and benefits, and weighting factors and risks and whatnot, I’m naturally going to weight those factors that I’ve seen with my eyes more heavily. Too heavily? Probably. Hard to tell, of course. How could I tell how heavily to weight the misery and waste of publish-or-perish? I see the people (not by Best Reader, so far) who have gone into the decision and come out busted, the university losing a good teacher (in at least four of the cases I personally know about, although to be fair, I don’t know that they are good teachers by any sort of objective metric, if such a thing exists) and the neighborhood losing a neighbor as the tenure-denied family packs up to go elsewhere, and all that. And did I mention selling the house? And in many of those cases, it seems to me that the problem is tenure, that the departments would, on the whole, be happy for the junior faculty member to keep teaching and going to committee meetings and all, but for tenure, well, they just don’t have the stuff for that.

Whereas, you know, the stuff about the Senate and term limits, while I do see the problems in theory, in practice there are very few bills that I am aware of as passing or not passing because of term limits, or cases where the bill that passes is significantly worse because of the lack of term limits. Is that because I’m just not paying attention? Or because I’m not working on the Hill, or married to somebody who is working on the Hill, with a bunch of other college buddies and siblings and other friends and acquaintances on the Hill as well. Or because the problem is trickier and more insidious, because the real problem is the committee chairs and their seniority-driven power to set the agendas, so that it rarely comes down to a vote and an old retrograde Senator who has rested on incumbency for a decade to publicly screw his constituents in that vote. Sure, all of that.

So I can make all the logical arguments in the world, and furthermore I can believe all of those arguments, and ever further all of those arguments can be right but that’s not why Matt and I have different instincts on these cases. Why is that other thing.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

April 30, 2009

It's what's for breakfast

So. The Youngest Member, when queried this morning about his breakfast wishes, announced that he wanted cookies, ice cream, cake, cupcake, and a chocolate milkshake. We, his parents, explained to him that those were desserts, and that they were not breakfast foods. Nobody eats cake for breakfast we told him, and then a few minutes later, in the kitchen, I appended to my Best Reader except doughnuts, of course. She agreed. Doughnuts, clearly an allowable breakfast food. Sure, it’s a treat, still, it’s nothing at all like having a piece of cake for breakfast, right?

Although, as my Best Reader pointed out, coffee cake was also potentially an allowable breakfast food. Not just corn muffins and bran muffins and blueberry muffins, but chocolate chip muffins are allowable as well, as are (again, as special treats) those chocolate muffins. Totally different from cake.

Also, danish. And pain au chocolat. And pancakes, with syrup, and possibly with chocolate chips. Also Chocolate Frosted Sugar Bombs, of course, and Honey Grahams, but not under any circumstances Graham crackers. Bread and honey, approved for breakfast. Honey cake, not approved for breakfast.

Apple danish, by the way, perfectly fine for breakfast. Apple strudel, OK. Apple pie, no. Pumpkin pie only allowable for breakfast in the state of Vermont.

Also, milkshakes must have some coffee in them. Right? Or am I wrong here?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

April 24, 2009

Er, welcome?

Anyway, I feel I should eventually write something about something that isn’t connected to Lois McMaster Bujold. Not yet, though. Maybe tomorrow’s Pirke Avot session will manage to avoid a connection.

I don’t think it’ll surprise anybody that I am ambivalent about the whole issue of audience in blogging. I think the issue of audience is very important for me and my writing of any kind: who am I aiming for, how will that audience know it’s for them, how is that audience likely to interpret what I’m saying (and more importantly how I’m saying it), what response do I want from that audience, who am I likely to offend, how much do I care…

This usually works very well for me when I am writing instruction manuals and memos, although it does mean that I take a lot longer to do it than people expect me to. Ah, well. And when I’m writing a play (more accurately, when I wrote the play), I am both writing for actors, who I know pretty well, and for audiences, who perplex me. Even when I’m in them. But for that experience, I was fortunate to have my own personal dramaturge, and I let her stand in for my audience, and that worked for me.

When writing for this Tohu Bohu, however, I am (I said this before) ambivalent. Much of the time, I rely on my image of the Gentle Reader, who has been reading for some time (years, probably) and comments now and then, knows what I’m on about, is knowledgeable about the world and its wife, and is likely to give me the benefit of the doubt. Some combination of Chris Cobb (who is an old college buddy) and Matt Hulan (who I’ve not yet met). There are perhaps two dozen of y’all, and I am comfortable with you. I long ago decided that I didn’t want an a-list blog with hundreds of thousands of readers, not only because I am too lazy to do the work to get there, but because then something blog-related would occur to make me unhappy every damned day. The way things are now, only rarely does anything cause me any blog-related stress, and when it does, it’s usually a miscommunication of some kind and is cleared up quickly.

However.

As a blog, it is open to the whole world. I try to keep in mind, as I write, that anybody could come and read, and that when I say anybody I do mean anybody, including any specific person. Ricky DiPietro could read a note here. Dick Cheney could read a note here. Evan Schnittman could read a note here. Whatever I say about those people is possibly being said directly to their faces. And that’s… intimidating.

Now, of course, most of the time, YHB can say whatever I want about somebody, and that person will not read it, and neither will their children, their spouse, their ex-lover, their mother, etc. And when I do a hatchet job, I generally do so on somebody who is sufficiently public that I feel my own attack will be lost amongst the far harsher attacks being leveled in other locations. And I have to say that I didn’t really think that Neal Asher had visited this Tohu Bohu, and I wasn’t at all sure that A. Lee Martinez had visited this Tohu Bohu, but at this point it’s pretty much certain that Lois McMaster Bujold visited. I mean, seriously. At what point of fame does the need to egogoogle fade? I do it every week or two, myself, but then I’m not famous at all, and this is only the third time that somebody I don’t know as a Gentle Reader has mentioned anything I’ve said. And, understand, I’m not mocking Ms. Bujold, or Mr. Asher, or Ms/Mr Martinez (I assumed masculinity or at least maleness, way back then, but that was based on nuthin’). Do you know how, when you’re a kid, you think that there’s some point of gruppness that indicates completion, but as you age you start to realize that you don’t get a grupp card on some birthday that indicates completion? You never really know if you’re complete until it’s over? I suppose fame is somewhat like that—Ms. Bujold knows that somebody is talking about her, somewhere, every moment of every day, the whole world around, but still… I was hoping the world wasn’t like that, somehow.

Anyway.

The point is not so much the famous people who I discuss here, fairly or unfairly, because even if it never occurred to me ever that Ms. Bujold would ever read anything I’d put into this Tohu Bohu, I do try to keep in mind that it is possible, and that famous people are still people, and ethical concerns come into play. That was made clear to me at one point when I read a thread at the old Baseball Primer about Barry Bonds and had a sudden horrific vision of his son reading it.

No, the point is that whilst I am writing for my Gentle Readers, and am (intermittently) able to keep in mind that any individual read could wind up here, I am utterly unable to keep in mind that a mass of people could wind up here. I don’t write for a mass of people. I can’t really imagine what it would be like to be the guy who put up the video of his baby’s laughing fit and had millions and millions of visitors, day after day for years. The idea of a sudden invasion by barbarian hordes scares the shit out of me.

And yet.

There’s no question that the arrival of dance (prone to laughter) at just the right moment was a terrific thing for this Tohu Bohu and for me. And Cat Faber is certainly welcome (any friend of Jed’s is a proverbial, here). And when the Online Encore game brought me fauxlore, that was wonderful. And Matt Hulan himself, and Dan P, both of whom have become pillars of our little, um, what is it that pillars are of? Porticos? Anyway, in actual experience, the introduction of new Gentle Readers to this Tohu Bohu has been a Good Thing, and the expansion from my Old College Buddies to a slightly wider circle has brought with it a lot of great conversation, as well as a wider range of actual experiences, which have served to set me straight on a bunch of things. All good.

And yet.

If you are new here, then, please don’t feel unwanted, and please be a bit patient if I seem defensive or hostile. I am ambivalent about the whole issue of audience in blogging.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

February 20, 2009

Back

Presumably, after all this time, Your Humble Blogger would have a whole slew of notes just sitting here waiting to be posted. Yeah, right. I utterly failed to spend five off-line days jonesing for this Tohu Bohu. When I got back on-line, my aggregator had five fucking hundred items waiting for me, and it took me another two days to get through them. And then there were rehearsals for Enchanted April, and starting to get my lines into my head. It's actually surprisingly easy to get used to not blogging…

Still, here it is a week and then some from my last post, and I'm finally typing in something to prepare for that magic moment when my Gracious Host tells me that I can once more log in to this blog. Which, presumably, has already happened by the time you read this. So there.

But the point of this pointless note is for me to remark to myself in semi-public about the things I could conceivably blog, so that I will create some pressure for myself to actually blog, thus getting myself back into the habit.

There's the long-delayed analysis of Our Only President's Inaugural Address. There's the next verse of Pirke Avot. There's some observations about baseball and steroids, which would probably be better left alone. There's something about higher education, I suppose, and the library. What else… I should catch up on my Book Reports, of course, but I'm actually not too far behind on them. Oh, yes, my Coraline experience. That'll do to go on with, yes?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

January 14, 2009

Two Thousand and One, a Blog Oddysey

Hunh. One thing about the new update is that I more frequently see the Big Stats on this Tohu Bohu. This includes a great little box on my end that is headed Most Popular Entries that simply says beneath it There are no popular entries. I love that box. I’m thinking of adding a box beneath it that says Prick and beneath it You’re a prick.

Anyway, one of the things it shows me is how many total posts there are in this Tohu Bohu. And as of right now, there are two thousand posts. Well, right now when YHB is typing. When I post this one, there will presumably be two thousand and one. I’m rather unpleasantly proud of this Tohu Bohu, along with a simultaneous feeling that it should be much better than it is, somehow. In the sixty-three weeks since I wrote a milestones note for my fifteen hundredth, I seem to have averaged eight notes a week, which seems like a lot. I’ve done a lot of Scriptural analysis since then, including a series on the Haftorah readings for the week that I rather enjoyed and the Pirke Avot series that is getting off to a good start. I have written a lot about theater, and enjoyed it. I don’t have a simple way to get statistics on categories, which is just as well, since they aren’t meaningful categories anyway. But it seems clear from glancing at it that much of my writing over the last year or so has been (a) Book Reports, (2) Scripture Reports, and (iii) Theater Production Reports, with a smattering of politics and music. That’s not how I expected this blog to look, but then, if I had any confidence in what I expected for this blog, I wouldn’t have called it a Tohu Bohu, would I? And then perhaps when I’m looking back at notes 4500-5000, it’ll look altogether different.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

January 13, 2009

An Apology

I feel I owe the Gentle Readers of this Tohu Bohu an apology. Not only because it’s sucked so badly over the last month or so. That’s happened before, and will undoubtedly happen again. I hope it has a stretch of not-sucking at some point, but I suppose that’s in the eye of the beholder.

Anyway, what I really want to apologize for is the state of the blog. First, those of you who are using an aggregator of some kind have presumably been seeing a lot of spam comments, many of which are not safe for work, in the sense that they are explicit porn. Sorry about that. I hope none of you have got in trouble on that account. I have been (1) slow to delete them and (b) bad at preventing them, because I suck, and my attention has largely been elsewhere.

Also, I have been meaning to spend time on the layout of the front page of the blog, and on the layout of the individual main pages, and I just haven’t. Sorry. I know that there are some busted links, and there’s some odd stuff up at the top, but fixing that sort of things is not terribly fun, and requires a stretch of uninterrupted computer time, and when I get a stretch of uninterrupted computer time, I have other things to do that are more fun. I hope things aren’t too bad.

And then the whole household got the Winter Vomiting. Not good, and tending to diminish both the uninterrupted computer time and YHB’s willingness to do things that are difficult and not terrible fun. We’re all better now (touch wood). So there’s at least a chance that I’ll put in the effort soon.

As for the actual content, well, there’s a chance that I will pay attention a bit more to the world at large, and that my thinking will improve as well. I’ll try.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

January 3, 2009

Still working

It’s the New Year, Gentle Readers, and I’ve got a handful of notes I’m planning to write. One about the employee-employer agreement, one about the designated Cabinet of Our Elected President, and the Year in Books. I also have a Book Report to catch up on (only one so far), there’s another note to write about Bound, and I missed a week on the Pirke Avot and would like to catch up on that, possibly today. I’m hoping that today will be a good day for writing.

On the other hand, if I were to have a few hours on the computer without constant interruption, I should fiddle with the templates of this blog. It will take some concentration, as my instincts for this css/mt business do not appear to line up with how it actually works. Yesterday I attempted to have visited links appear in a different color than unvisited links, and it took away my serifs. For about an hour. Then they came back, wagging their…well, they are tails, aren’t they?

Anyway, the point of this note is just to give Gentle Readers a chance to tell YHB what might improve this Tohu Bohu in terms of the fiddly bits, rather than the writing. The Potential Notes are gone, for now; I don’t know if I’ll bother bringing them back, as I wasn’t doing anything with them. I could put the latest comment widget and the search box on the side of the individual entry page. Oh, and I’m probably getting rid of the pop-up comment screen, and making the comment link go to the comment section of the individual entry page. Is there anything else? Bigger type? Smaller? Less clutter? More clutter? Polls? Your wish is my, well, topic for consideration.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

December 30, 2008

Please Stand By

Gentle Readers, forgive this blog its technical problems. My Gracious Host has updated the software, and we all know what that means. The midnight oil lasts for eight days, and at the end of it, I still gripe at him about the flaws of the software (about which he can do nothing, of course). I know the comment links aren’t working just yet, and commenting may be hinky too, for a while. Don’t worry, we’ll be back up and running in the New Year. It’s also possible that things will be Improved! from your end in some way that I’m rather vague about at present; I can already see that things will be Improved! from my end, and it will give you a warm glow just to know that, I’m sure.

In the meantime, please send copies of error messages to Vardibidian blah blah, you know the drill. And smoke ’em if you got em.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

December 17, 2008

Shoe shoe shoe, baby, don't cry baby

Your Humble Blogger is hoping to get a couple more Book Reports done, and we are within inches of having a full set of Cabinet Nominees for me to appreciate, but none of that is going to get a note written tonight. Sorry, Gents. This week’s notes were far too long, and now I can’t get back in the typing mood. Plus, there is much to do around here away from the keyboard. So.

So. I’ll just mention, that if anybody had told me, oh, eight years ago, that the fellow who was going to be Our Only President for the next two terms—two terms!—would be in a country we had invaded and occupied, and some crazed local journalist would fling his shoes at the President of the United States in anger and contempt, and that much of the world would (a) react with sympathy for the shoe-flinger, and (2) immediately believe the unconfirmed and biased report that the shoe-flinger had been severely beaten in prison after being dragged away, well… I didn’t like the guy, and I remember thinking that he would be a lousy President, but that it probably wouldn’t be all that bad, certainly not worse than Ronald Reagan.

And if you told me that not only would our standing around the world be so low, but that a good portion (possibly most) of the population of this country would react with sympathy and would believe that report… and that I would react that way as well…

Look, he’s the President of the United States, and as I’ve been saying, he’s the only one we’ve got (for a while yet, anyway). I should take the insult to the President at least somewhat as an insult to this nation (which it was), and should bridle at the idea that people should fling shoes at the President. And I do bridle at it. Don’t fling shoes at the President, people! Just don’t do it! No more!

Whew. I managed to work myself up to it. It wasn’t easy, though.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

December 3, 2008

State of the Blog

Your Humble Blogger is down to two wisdom teeth. The oral surgeon pointed out that the teeth don’t hold up to a cost-benefit analysis: you still have to brush them and floss them and maintain them, but they don’t really help you chew. This may be true, but the marginal cost of maintaining the teeth (assuming you are brushing the ones next to them anyway) seems pretty small, while the cost of removing them seems pretty big. Not just the monetary cost, which has got to be a big chunk of the premium money on top of a hefty co-payment, but the cost in time and agita. We needed a babysitter for the time I was in surgery, and then more babysitting for the rest of the day, since I was not really capable of looking after children, or other responsible tasks such as wiping drool off my chin. Still, thirty hours or so later, I’m back to what we laughingly refer to as normal, with the added excitement of trying to restrain myself from playing around with my tongue and the sutures.

It’s like that thing where you tie a knot in a cherry stem with your tongue. Only a lot less sexy.

Anyway, what with houseguests, Thanksgiving, and oral surgery, I’m afraid the blog has been on the back proverbial for a week or more. Which is probably fine; I wrote 41 entries in November and 41 in October, which I think is a two-month record. And both months topped a hundred comments, which makes YHB very happy, particularly after whinging so much about the summer.

As for December, well, I’m expecting to continue the Pirke Avot series, and there’s the imperative to catch up with Book Reports by New Year’s Eve, so that in January I can write my Year in Books. I’m not sure if I’ll continue my Music Mondays; I like the idea of them, even if the actual notes haven’t been up to that idea. And in January, I’m hoping for a few posts on a theatrical topic that I am not ready to start just yet. And I imagine things will come to me.

Still, if there is anything any Gentle Reader would like me to rant about or comment on, sock it to me.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

November 27, 2008

Thanks

Happy Thanksgiving, all you Gentle Readers in the You Ess of Eh! Your Humble Blogger had a very traditional Thanksgiving involving lots of Turkey, a stroll in the chilly late-Autumn air and a long afternoon nap. I did not watch or play football, which is just as well, really.

I know it’s been a quiet week here at the old Tohu Bohu. The thing about a library server going down is that it’s a lot of work when it goes down, but even more work when it comes back up. Combining that with some very lovely and welcome houseguests, a festive meal that requires the candying of yams, and a bad case of Blogger’s Back, and, well, it’s been a quiet week at the old Tohu Bohu.

One thing that’s become a Thanksgiving tradition is the list of Things for which one is Thankful For. I enjoy reading those sorts of lists—heck, that tradition itself is a fair thing for which to be thankful for—but I’m not going to indulge in one here. Much, much, much. Let it all go without saying.

I will either be back tomorrow with (most likely) a series of Book Reports (I am behind again) or I will back on Saturday with Pirke Avot. In the meantime, enjoy whatever Thanksgiving traditions you enjoy, or if you happen to be somewhere that celebrates its Thanksgiving in October or some other time of year, enjoy not doing whatever Thanksgiving traditions you dislike.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

November 21, 2008

Mustela erminea, or the weasel with the raggedy tail

The Youngest Member loves an ermine. It’s a stuffie toy, made by the Fuzzy Town people, white and cute with a little black tip to the tail. The tail is important. Well, ermine tails are important; it’s how you know they are ermines. This particular ermine tail is important because the Youngest Member cannot function as a toddler without frequently inserting the tip of the tail into his ear. Also, daily repetitions of an exercise involving holding the ermine tail between the big toe and the next toe and pulling with all one’s strength appears to be an important part of his regimen. In all, a tail of no mean value.

The tail has been surgically re-attached twice.

So far.

The cloth is fraying. The next time the tail goes, it will take inventive and creative measures, and frankly, there are limits.

Your Humble Blogger being, as parents of toddlers tend to be, not overscrupulous in matters of deception and dishonesty, I had developed a Plan to purchase a second ermine, identical to the first in every respect, except that instead of containing the diamonds being old, filthy, ragged and worn-out, it would be clean and new. Briefly.

OK, we were willing to buy two new ones.

Only they don’t make ’em like that any more.

As a result, the Youngest Member will learn at a tender age that material objects are all ephemera. Look on my plush toys, ye mighty, and despair! I am sure that he will learn to love his inevitably tailless ermine, just as many of us loved our stuffies to bits when we were children, and then they acquired the power of nostalgia to take the place of their missing tails, eyes or fuzz.

A few weeks back, Abi Sutherland over at Making Light wrote about a few of my favorite things, starting a thread of people talking about those things that are “most precious to you”. The thread is interesting in a variety of ways (as many at that location are), and I thought to myself at the time I wonder what objects in my life are precious to me. Perhaps I would write a blog entry about it, someday. I made a note. I thought about it.

I had a lot of difficulty coming up with, say, a Top Five. Part of that is that I can’t decide on the criteria. Are they the things I would save in a fire? The things I get the most joy out of? The things that I have invested the most sentiment in? The irreplaceable things? One of my most precious possessions is a coffee mug that actually is a replacement for the one that broke. Since the preciousness (OK, in two senses) is connected to the story behind the mug, and the story behind the replacement of the mug is also a good and precious story, it’s possible that the replacement mug is actually more precious to me than the matching original.

Another possible answer is a sweater my mother knitted for me to my design. I wear it every three or four days all through the winter. It’s gray with a dark blue honeycomb pattern across the torso. It’s a nice sweater, and my mother made it for me, and I will be sad when it develops a hole that I can’t fix. But most of the time, when I wear it, it’s just a nice gray sweater; I don’t derive more joy out of it than the really comfy storebought one that is my other gray favorite.

I have a lot of books, including a few first editions and a few signed by the authors. I value them, I like having them, I take a sort of pride in them, but if somehow the idea of them being destroyed or lost is one I can face with equanimity. If I lost both our copies of Leave it to Psmith (mine and my Best Reader’s), I would go out and buy another. My mother’s old aleph-bet? The dictionary my mother gave me when I went to college because I was not eligible to get the dictionary given by the local chapter of the Seven Sisters Alumnae to those attending their almae materae? I like having them, but I wouldn’t put them on that list.

What about my tools, things that I use all the time? My laptop computer is swell, but it’s also running Windows Vista, so I would have to admit that I curse it far more than I praise it. And frankly, it’s not all that shiny. I have an mp3 player that, you know, plays mp3s, and I like that it does that, but I would happily trade it in for a better one. My Best Reader has an iPod, which is shiny and kinda cool, but I would happily trade that in for a better one. I like our Prius, but again, I would happily trade it in for a newer one. We have a few Good Knives, which I am glad of when I want to cut things, but if we didn’t have Good Knives, I would cut things with Crappy Knives and grunt and move on.

OK, my pens. For now, I am using three pens, mostly: my grandfather’s Pelikan, which is marvelously easy to fill but has a teeny tiny nib that I don’t much like; my trusty but cheap Osmiroid, for which I cannot find a cartridge converter that I like, since I dropped the last one down the drain whilst attempting to clean it; and a speedball nib (C-4) in a Koh-I-Noor holder for dipping. Each of these has annoying aspects, although I do enjoy using each of them. I would probably miss any of them, were I to (f’r’ex) drop them down the drain whilst attempting to clean them.

Last category that comes to mind is momentos. Snapshots of me in various plays. Awards that I won for doing various things at various times. Correspondence—there we are getting close. I have several boxes of letters and postcards, and the contents of those boxes would grieve me greatly to miss. They are almost certainly my most precious possessions. On the other hand, I keep them in those boxes, rarely take them out and look at them, and other than vaguely wanting to keep them intact, I have little use for them, either practical or spiritual. I get little joy from them, on a day-to-day basis.

In fact, there isn’t anything I get joy from near as much as the Youngest Member gets from that beat-up crusty ermine. Sometimes, after he has had one of his screaming fits, we present him with the ermine, and the screaming stops, the tip of the tail goes into his ear, and the anger almost visibly eases from him. At night, he may be resistant to the whole idea of going to bed, but once we pick him up and start singing “Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star” and put the ermine in his arms, he is reconciled and snuggles in.

I have no object I love like that. I couldn’t love an object like that. It’s a toddler thing. And I suspect that’s why I can’t make my list of five precious possessions. If I didn’t have the Youngest Member and his example of what love for an inanimate object really looks like, I would probably just list off five things—the mug, the box of correspondence, my grandfather’s pen, my mother-of-pearl cufflinks, and the little fortune-cookie slip that reads give a kiss to the person sitting next to you that I keep meaning to slight-of-hand in at a Chinese restaurant—and not worry much about the criteria or the implications. As it is, though, I can’t do that.

And maybe, the right answer is that my most precious possession are those two new clean ermines with strong stitching on their tails. The one’s we can’t buy, because they stopped making them.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

November 8, 2008

Looking good, feeling lousy

A question occurs to me today on which I would like to survey my Gentle Readers (and their friends and associates and their sisters and their cousins and their aunts). On a day when you feel lousy, but have to go to work anyway—let me clarify and stipulate a bit here. By work, I’m essentially thinking about a day in public that you can’t easily get out of, whether it is paid work or attending classes or the church rummage sale that you volunteered for or whatever. And by lousy, let’s say something like the migraine, or a toothache, or I suppose menstrual cramps. Let’s take contagion out of it, because this isn’t about when to call in sick and go back to bed, but the kind of thing that you know is going to make you miserable all the day long, without preventing you from actually fulfilling your responsibility.

So. On a day like that, do you (1) crawl into whatever clothes are near the bed and comfortable and meet minimum requirements, putting as little of your miniscule supply of energy into the process as you can get away with, or (B) put on that special shirt (or dress or whatever) and put extra effort into your morning grooming, figuring that you need the extra energy over the day that you will get from knowing you look bitchen?

I’m wondering if this is a highly gendered thing, statistically, what with women growing up with more faith in the power of clothing, or whether it isn’t, because it has more to do with optimism and pessimism and so on. Or whether women are more likely to conserve energy, as on the whole they must have far more days like this than men do.

Your Humble Blogger is of the second set, the ones who dress up to ease the pain. But then, that doesn’t stop it from being highly gendered the other way, as I could just be an outlier (this charge of effeminacy is new to me, he said, arching his eyebrow). What’s your strategy?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

October 25, 2008

Twenty Questions about Food

So. I happened to pick up this interminable list of food questions from fauxklore’s lj, and I wound up answering all of them. The thing is, I am not in any way a foodie. I suspect that the list of questions is more interesting for somebody who thinks about food more often (and more variously); to the extent that mine is interesting at all, it is interesting because my answers are so boring. If you know what I mean. Because I don’t cook very often, or very well, or eat at a variety of restaurants, my answers to these questions highlight the paucity of my gustatory imagination. Which, I hope, makes them worth reading.

  1. What’s the last thing you ate? A brownie. One of my co-workers brought in brownies and I had to be polite, didn’t I?
  2. What’s your favorite cheese? Gouda. It’s gouda and it’s gouda for you!
  3. What’s your favorite fish? I like salmon a lot. I’ve had wonderful swordfish, and that was probably the best fish dish I’ve had, but salmon is very likely to be tasty.
  4. What’s your favorite fruit? Apple.
  5. When, if ever, did you start liking olives? If I remember correctly, it was just about the time that hell froze over.
  6. When, if ever, did you start liking beer? I don’t like beer. I did start drinking cider when I was in England and looking for something to drink in a pub, and I discovered that I really like cider, so I drink a lot of that. This summer, late in the summer, I drank a lot of that lemonade-flavored beer as well.
  7. When, if ever, did you start liking shellfish? I don’t remember not liking shrimp, but I ate it only very rarely growing up. I discovered that I like scallops around, oh, 1994 or 1995 or so? I had lobster for the first time around then as well, and discovered that I liked it OK, although it wasn’t worth the effort.
  8. What was the best thing your parent/s used to make? My mother’s famous candied yams. I have the recipe (not really a recipe, more of an instruction manual) and it’s my bring-along dish for festive occasions.
  9. What’s the native specialty of your home town? Phoenix, Arizona? Specialty dish? Er, um. I know! Cactus jelly!
  10. What’s your comfort food? Potato chips. Although it is probably worth mentioning that the absence of tea means the absence of comfort, so to that extent, the answer is tea.
  11. What’s your favorite type of chocolate? Probably good hot chocolate, very rich.
  12. How do you like your steak? Cut from a lamb or a pig.
  13. How do you like your burger? My Best Reader combines ground meats, including lamb and turkey and pork, in some mystic combination, with breadcrumbs and spices and egg and whatnot. So good. But of course they need to be well-cooked.
  14. How do you like your eggs? In a sandwich: English muffin, egg and sausage. Or swimming-pool eggs, where you fry the egg in the hole in a slice of bread. Either way, they have to be over hard (or at least fairly hard) or it doesn’t work.
  15. How do you like your potatoes? Sliced very thin and fried crispy. Or mushed into a slurry with salt and whatever the hell else is in a Pringle and molded into that Pringle shape.
  16. How do you take your coffee? Right over to my Best Reader.
  17. How do you take your tea? Often.
  18. What’s your favorite mug? The mug I drink from the most often is a lightweight grey travel mug. It used to have a logo on it from an educational institution that employed me, but the shield has worn off and the lettering has nearly worn off. It now says EDY RNM. I also have two mugs that I drink from at home (alternately, not simultaneously) that were a gift from my father-in-law from Las Vegas New York. But my favorite mug is the mug I got from the Alumni Office of my alma mater that has the school logo and the words ‘I was mugged by the Alumni Office’. But there’s a story there.
  19. What’s your cookie of choice? Chocolate chip. Medium size, medium soft. No nuts. Second choice would be a really chewy molasses cookie.
  20. What’s your ideal breakfast? A great big cup of really good hot tea. An excellent newspaper. My Best Reader (not to eat, to converse with). Probably an egg sandwich, with sausage or bacon.
  21. What’s your ideal sandwich? Now I’m thinking about an egg sandwich, and it sounds pretty darn good to me. With really crisp bacon? Mmm. Other than that, good maple ham and provolone and brown mustard on ciabatta, pressed hot.
  22. What’s your ideal pizza (topping and base)? Thick crust (Sicilian), sweet garlicky sauce, lots of cheese, pepperoni. But I’m happy with a plain cheese pizza.
  23. What’s your ideal pie (sweet or savory)? Apple. Just out of curiosity, would Boston Cream Pie count in this category, or is it a cake?
  24. What’s your ideal salad? Chicken Caesar, with lots of parmesan shavings and small crunchy croutons.
  25. What food do you always like to have in the fridge? Cold cuts and baby carrots. Also, I keep water chilled in the fridge.
  26. What food do you always like to have in the freezer? Ice cream, frozen veggies, sausage of some kind (hot dog, kielbasa, breakfast sausage, chicken-apple), bad frozen pizza.
  27. What food do you always like to have in the cupboard? Noodles, tomato sauce, potato chips. Also wine, but that’s a different cupboard.
  28. What spices can you not live without? I could probably live without the whole rack, if I had to. But if I don’t have oregano, pepper and garlic, it’s hard for me to cook with the rest of the rack.
  29. What sauces can you not live without? Is mustard a sauce? What about honey? Otherwise, if there were no barbecue sauce in the world, I would be all sad and stuff.
  30. Where do you buy most of your food? Well, my Best Reader buys most of our food, mostly at the nearest supermarket, a Shaw’s. That’s probably where I buy more food than anywhere else, although I also shop at the corner market (called Hall’s Market), the A&P, a kosher market and the CostCo.
  31. How often do you go food shopping? Probably between us we make a stop three times a week. Maybe more.
  32. What’s the most you’ve spent on a single food item? I have no idea. We did buy one of those Box O’Meat deals this summer, but that’s not a single food item. A leg of lamb?
  33. What’s the most expensive piece of kitchen equipment you own? Not counting the range and the fridge? We have one of those sandwich presses; that’s probably the most expensive. We have some lovely knives that would probably be expensive, but we didn’t pay for them.
  34. What’s the last piece of equipment you bought for your kitchen? A fine mesh strainer. And there’s a story there, too.
  35. What piece of kitchen equipment could you not live without? Well, if I didn’t have a refrigerator, it would be pretty tough. Other than that, there’s no single thing that I can think of in the absence of which I couldn’t make do with something else. Even a teapot.
  36. How many times a week/month do you cook from raw ingredients? It depends on what is meant, here, but I’m going to say three times a week. I’m counting lunches and breakfasts and I’m counting some things as cooking from raw ingredients that probably shouldn’t count. My Best Reader, on the other hand, cooks from raw ingredients at least half-a-dozen times a week by any definition, and probably a dozen by mine. Not counting baking.
  37. What’s the last thing you cooked from raw ingredients? This is a good example of what I was talking about. I made tortilla pizza with store-bought tortillas and a tomato sauce my Best Reader made with store-bought sausage and a can of tomato sauce and a jar of pre-minced garlic and some other stuff. Is that cooking from raw ingredients? Probably not. If you don’t count that, I made a fry-up recently with potato, egg, cheese and ham. You don’t count that, either? Man, you are tough.
  38. What’s your favorite thing to make for yourself? You know that fry-up thing? That’s probably it. In terms of enjoying the making part.
  39. What meats have you eaten besides cow, pig, chicken and turkey?
  40. Lamb, venison, goat, alligator, buffalo, rattlesnake. Fowls: definitely duck and goose, and ostrich and I’m pretty sure I’ve had game bird, although I can’t remember what: quail or squab or something.
  41. What’s the last time you ate something that had fallen on the floor? 11:40 am.
  42. What’s the last time you ate something you’d picked in the wild? Does a commercial apple orchard count as the wild? If not, I may never have eaten anything picked in the wild. I don’t particularly like berries, which are the only things I remember being with people picking wild and eating. I have sipped honeysuckle from the vine, though.
  43. Place the following cuisines in order of preference (greatest to least): Indian, Chinese, Italian, Thai, French, sushi. Although I get a yen for Chinese the most often of those, but I like Indian more when I do eat it.
  44. Place the following boozes in order of preference (greatest to least): Vodka, rum, brandy, whiskey, gin, tequila. This is mostly based on one or two tastes. I don’t drink strong liquor straight, and I don’t drink mixed drinks very often, either. I may not have had any of those boozes (not counting things cooked with them) in a year or more.
  45. Place the following flavors in order of preference (greatest to least): Garlic, lime, ginger, basil, aniseed. The middle three are close enough together that I could put them in any order.
  46. Place the following fruits in order of preference (greatest to least): Apple, orange, banana, pineapple, watermelon, cherry. A big drop-off after pineapple.
  47. Bread and spread: Just bread and spread? Hm. Crusty Italian and butter. Although a baguette and gouda would be better, if you are big-category in spreads.
  48. What’s your fast food restaurant of choice, and what do you usually order? First would be a local pizza joint, two slices of pepperoni. If I can’t locate one, or the local pizza is inedible, a Quizno’s chicken sandwich.
  49. What are three of the best dining-out experiences you’ve had?OK, here is the difference between me and a foodie. My best dining-out experiences have been about the conversation and the company, not the food. I’ve eaten good food, I’ve eaten things that made me say wow this is the best thing I’ve ever eaten, but I don’t have any memory of it after a few months. So. Three great dining-out experiences. A few years ago, on (or nearly on) my Best Reader’s birthday, we ate in a little restaurant in Boston’s North End called l’Osteria. There was soup with tortellini, and I believe I had a citrusy chicken dish of some kind, and we chatted and had a lovely time, and then went to the New Garden to watch the Beanpot finals. That’s one. Another could be eating at Goat Hill Pizza with my Best Reader and two other Gentle Readers (long before there was a Tohu Bohu) at a sort of all-you-can-eat night where it was a sort of pizza dim sum experience, and we ate so much we staggered back to the bus to ride home in replete silence. Although generally I think a great dining-out experience shouldn’t involve so much regret afterward. And a third one could be—can I count the time we bought an éclair the size of my fucking head from a cart in Camden Town? Or how’s this for what YHB is really like: one of my best dining-out experiences was the first time that the guys at Pinocchio’s saw me come in the door on a busy day, I held up two fingers, and when I got to the front of the line two slices of pepperoni were on the counter waiting.
  50. What’s your choice of tipple at the end of a long day? Port wine.
  51. Favorite cookbook/s? I don’t have one. I’m very fond of the stuff my Best Reader makes out of the Wooden Spoon Bread Book, though.
  52. Got any favorite food blogs? No. I did read Sarahparah’s Cook and Nifty Wench blog for a while, but I guess it’s defunct, now.
  53. What’s the next thing you’ll eat? Does tea count? No? Then I don’t know. I mean, I could make it easy by declaring that I will eat a piece of chocolate, and then doing it, but that doesn’t seem right. No, my Best Reader is preparing some sort of dinner, thank goodness, and I have no idea whatsoever what it might be. If I had to guess… fish?

I wrote most of this yesterday afternoon; the next thing I ate turned out to be the aforementioned lamburgers, some very grainy whole grain grain grain bread (which was technically the first thing I ate, as I had a bite after the blessing), some squash and a very tasty carrot dish with butter, brown sugar and ginger. And a glass of wine. So I should append to this note about me not being a foodie that I eat very well indeed, actually.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

September 29, 2008

Head of the year, tail of the year

In a few hours now, it’ll be Rosh Hashanah, the head of the year. May you all be inscribed in the Book of Life, Gentle Readers, for a good year, and a healthy year, and a sweet year. We could use one, couldn’t we?

It’s just beginning to be autumn here in central Connecticut. The trees are mostly green in my leafy town, so the dozen or so that have begun to show fall colors stand out. One on Prospect with a lot of red, one on Arnoldale all orange, and the ones over by the athletic center are all yellow. Mostly, though, it’s green, green, green—but not for long.

The days are getting shorter, too. We’ve passed the equinox; we passed below twelve hours of daylight last week. By Hallowe’en it’ll be down to ten and a half hours or so, and then we’ll be back on standard time and the sun will be down at quarter to five. The workday is still ending in daylight, but not for long.

Perhaps that’s why this Rosh Hashanah feels to YHB more like the winding up of the old year than the opening of the new one. The image that we play with for this holiday of the Book of Life (on Rosh Hashanah it is written, and on Yom Kippur, it is sealed) doesn’t usually deal with last year’s volume. We’re getting to the last few words, I imagine, of whatever was written for us this last year. Was it a sweet year? A healthy year?

We do, traditionally, look back on the year, for the purpose of arguing our case before the Heavenly Judge, and we run around apologizing to everybody for whatever harms we may have occasioned, for our sins to each other of omission and commission. We forgive each other, more or less sincerely, hoping to be forgiven ourselves, more or less sincerely. That whole human forgiveness thing has to come first, before Divine forgiveness, both in traditional rabbinic teaching and modern psychological understanding. But that backwards look is largely unconnected to the Book. We don’t submit a subpoena to have the Book admitted in evidence. Perhaps because we feel it wouldn’t on the whole do our cause much good.

Anyway.

Gentle Readers, I do hope you forgive me for my various failings, both as Vardibidian and (as many of you know me) in the Real World.

I suppose this would be a good holiday season to talk about the traditional Mishnaic financial structure, under which it is absolutely forbidden to charge interest on loans, and similarly forbidden to lend money (or lease real property) for longer than seven years. Such rules, even if routinely broken as we can assume them to be, would clearly have prevented the modern world entirely, not just its sudden dissolution this month.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

September 17, 2008

Constitution Day

According to Presidential Proclamation and in accordance with the law, today is Constitution Day and Citizenship Day and the start of Constitution Week, the one week out of fifty-two where our government abides by the restrictions of the Constitution.

No, that’s not right.

What should YHB and y’all do to celebrate the Constitution today? This Tohu Bohu is not legally obligated to hold an educational program, since we aren’t currently receiving federal funds. And once again, Sen. Byrd, making Constitution Day mandatory is missing the point badly, badly.

We could sing the Preamble. That’s always nice. I did my Top Five provisions a few years ago, and I don’t know that they’ve changed in the interim. Gentle Readers in the Bay State can enjoy the results of yesterday’s primary elections; there was a lovely sticker-shock victory for Carl Sciortino and Dianne Wilkerson appears to have lost her primary, which I find shocking. Elections have consequences, which is good to keep in mind, right?

Or we could promote the general welfare. The thing is, without a formal declaration of war, there’s no rank higher than general available, and even in wartime, a general can only be promoted to a different kind of general.

Maybe I’ll just go find a busker and give him my James Madison dollar.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

September 4, 2008

August is the cruelest month

Well, and August was a lousy month for this Tohu Bohu, wasn’t it? I wrote 34 entries, if I counted correctly, and y’all contributed only 26 comments (plus nine of YHB’s comments in response). That’s a low for comments, at least for the last couple of years. I blame myself. And Matt Hulan.

Anyway, my show now being over (I will have at least one more post about the show, probably today or tomorrow), and the year having started (the academic year, that is, the one that dominates my life and I’m guessing the lives of several of y’all), and the campaign having at last begun for realsies (huzzah), I am hoping for more active conversation here.

Although I’m low on inspiration. So. I’m opening up this Tohu Bohu for y’all to give me ideas on what to write about, that y’all will converse about. The election? Presidential and Legislative? More about music? More about the library? Hungarian jokes? Rants about items in the daily news?

OK, to get y’all used to commenting again, here’s a direct question for you: Do you read lefty blogs? Specifically, do you read (a) Eschaton, (2) Talking Point Memo (looking at the front/headlines), (iii) TAPped? I have been assuming that any of y’all who have any interest in politics read those blogs, and so not commenting on things that are covered there, unless I strongly disagree with what appears to be the agreed take by those commenters. Should that be my continuing policy? Or should I pass along observations I agree with, to expose y’all to the highlights of Left Blogovia?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

September 3, 2008

Middle of the Road

So. This past weekend, Your Humble Blogger completed the run of Pygmalion and had a birthday. Closing night was the eve of what I’ve come to think of as my first thirty-ninth birthday. This confluence (and, um, some alcoholic intake) led me to brood over endings and passings. I’m not going to be doing another show with that gang, and I’m not going to be in my mid-thirties anymore, either.

The gang are pretty terrific. This is my third show with the same director and stage manager, and four castmates have joined me in all three of them, another one in two of the three. All good people. And the actors who I met for this show were good people, too; they were the sort of people I would want to be in three shows with. And it’s possible, if unlikely, that I will be in a show with one of them again someday, or even two. But not more than that. I am not driving sixty miles to rehearsals again; that was crazy.

Before doing those three shows, I had stopped doing theater for about ten years. I left college with the idea of becoming a professional actor; I soon discovered that I didn’t actually want to be a professional actor. I still enjoyed theater, though, and for a few years, I did shows at the community theater level. I found that level frustrating. Many people who do community theater are more interested in socializing with their friends in the group than in working on a show, which infuriated YHB, who still attempted to maintain a professional attitude (vaddevah I thought dat meant). The production values were often terrible, not only because of a shoestring budget but because nobody cared about the lights, or the sound, or the stage management. I didn’t have a whole lot of fun.

When I walked in to auditions for The Man Who Came to Dinner, I had determined that I wouldn’t make myself angry about professionalism. If I had a good time, and we put on a decent show, that would be fine. In fact, we put on a terrific show, and although the cast wasn’t in the least professional, we had a good time and worked hard. So I did another show, with most of the same people, and it was great. Since I was a lead this time, it was more work for me, but enjoyable work, and we had a terrific time and put on a good show in the end. Then I moved from Western Connecticut to Greater Hartford, and welcomed the Youngest Member, and took another couple of years off theater. And then our director told me she was doing Pygmalion, and my Best Reader said that technically, it wasn’t actually impossible. And once again, I worked hard and had a good time, and the show was good. But I also spent three hours a day in the car, and I missed dinner with my family four days a week for two months, not to mention the kids’ bedtime, and my Best Reader lost two months of work on her book because she was single-parenting while I was driving. So that won’t happen again.

I keep coming back to the definition of middle-age that I came across recently: it’s the time of life when people stop thinking about the future in terms of what they will be able to do, and start thinking about the future in terms of what they won’t be able to do. There’s youth, of course, when every year or two there’s some new thing you are admitted to: middle-school, movies on your own, driving, dating, voting, draft age, credit cards, car rental, drinking, sex, a real job, your own apartment, marriage, home ownership, promotion, parenthood. At thirty-five, you are qualified to be President of the United States, and that’s the last one until you start getting discounts. Your Humble Blogger is thirty-nine at last; there's the house, the children, a job, my Best Reader’s career. I’ve got a wonderful life; I am clam-happy. And middle-aged.

Do I want to go and visit family across the country? I can do that, thank the Divine, as long as I budget for it, and arrange it so that the Perfect Non-Reader doesn’t miss too much school. And of course I can’t just crash on somebody’s sofa anymore, because of my back (and my knee), so I need to either stay with somebody who has a guest room or take a hotel room, and there has to be enough room for the Perfect Non-Reader, and somewhere for the Youngest Member, too, and if we all share a room, nobody’s going to get much sleep, and you know? The hell with it.

That’s what I mean by middle-aged. It’s not chronological, it’s a combination of life’s circumstances and frame of mind. And I’m in it.

The important thing is to remember that I am in the middle-aged frame of mind because I've got so many wonderful things. I don’t want to be eighteen anymore, or twenty-three or even thirty. I want to have what I’ve got: a family, a home town, a settled life, immovables, habits, comforts. That’s not a bad thing.

And while the knee hurts a lot, and the back is always vulnerable, and the extra forehead limits my choice of hairstyle, the stamina is just about where it should be at this point, I’m still at the point where the physical plant problems are an inconvenience, rather than a barrier or a burden, something to keep in mind rather than something that can’t be ignored. So that’s all right, d’y’see?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

August 29, 2008

Home States

OK, here’s an odd question: Joshua Keating over at FP Passport notes that “this election now features both a Hawaiian and an Alaskan”. I know it’s considered a good thing for a Presidential or Vice-Presidential candidate to have two or even three home states, but is it a good thing for us regular joes?

I have voted as a resident of five states. Sequentially, yes. I grew up in Arizona, and voted absentee as an Arizona resident during my college years in Pennsylvania. After college, I lived for three years in California, then for ten in Massachusetts, then a year and a half in Virginia, and now I’ve been in Connecticut for three years. Is that right? Three years? Well, anyway. I still think of myself as an Arizonan, and I think of myself as a Nutmegger now as well, but although I do still feel a connection to Pennsylvania, California, Massachusetts and Virginia, I certainly don’t think of them as home states.

Do any of you think of yourselves as having two home states? Or three?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

August 25, 2008

Things to Do in Denver when You're Not in Denver

Your Humble Blogger watched almost all of last cycle’s Democratic Convention, and blogged a lot of it, and enjoyed it quite a bit. I particularly enjoyed blogging the not-ready-for-prime-time stuff. And I would enjoy watching and blogging again this year: this evening will be a dozen or so Representatives with whom I am mostly unfamiliar, the Attorney General of Illinois, Sen. Klobuchar, some union folk, eventually Sens. Harkin and McCaskill, and of course Michelle Obama. And I will watch some of it, I hope. But not much.

Part of that is simply the time zone thing. Today’s action starts at three in the afternoon, Mountain Time, which is five in Connecticut, not a good hour for focusing on the live stream . The two or three hours that follow are also bad; I could have the stream on, but I will be eating dinner with my family (a very important thing, which I have missed far too often this summer), and then playing with my children and getting them to bed. I can’t say I know for sure when Ms. Obama will speak, but the schedule calls for her to be the last speech, likely at around ten o’clock our time. I may watch, or I may turn in early; I am still catching up on lost sleep from being in a show.

Anyway, I will probably make the odd comment or two, but I’m afraid that for full convention blogging you will have to look elsewhere. Or do it yourself! I’ll open this Tohu Bohu to guest posts on the convention, or you can comment on these posts. Help a brother out, Gentle Readers.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

August 11, 2008

Oh, the bed!

Over at the OUP blog, which is a strange thing, they feature some advice for insomniacs from Overcoming Insomnia, by Jack D. Edinger and Colleen E. Carney. Now, YHB is an insomniac, and some of the advice seems like it might be worth trying, but I had to point out this bit.

While in bed, you should avoid doing things that you do when you are awake. Do not read, watch TV, eat, study, use the phone, or do other things that require you to be awake while you are in bed. …Sexual activity is the only exception to this rule.

Hunh? I mean, yes, I get the concept that if you comfortably read in bed (or watch TV, or write in your journal) then it is harder to tell your body that you’re in bed damn it, and that it is time to sleep. I understand that, and even if I’m a bit skeptical, I see why it makes sense as advice. But if you are training your insomnia that BED=SLEEP, then why make the exception for sex? I mean, surely if you, for instance, said that the only two things you do in bed are read and sleep, then, well, the light’s off, and your body is largely shutting down and relaxing, and even if your mind is in the mood to read, well, as I say, I understand the advice, but hell! If the only two things you do in the bed are sleep and WHOOOOOHOOO, then isn’t your body going to get a bit confused? I mean, I would be. Frankly, if you are going to make an exception for sex, then you may as well order pizza and put on tap shoes, because BED doesn’t equal SLEEP anymore.

In fact, reading the advice, I would be inclined to think that for an insomniac (and it should be clear that this advice is for insomniacs only) the advice to keep a bed that is only for sleeping, and to take your sexual activity to another bed (or wherever) would be more persuasive. Yes, yes, sexual activity can make a fellow sleepy, but I’m guessing most insomniacs will try that method long before they start buying clinical workbooks. When you get to the book-buying stage, you are willing to try keeping another bed for screwing. Winston Churchill (it is said) would change beds when he couldn’t sleep, and in the morning he was sober and she was still ugly. Or something.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

July 28, 2008

Many returns

Your Humble Blogger spent the weekend at a wedding and the surrounding events. The people getting married are Gentle Readers (and occasional commenters) at this Tohu Bohu; one overlapped with me at college and is therefore an Old College Buddy within the meaning of the act, while the other is a year younger and does not so qualify, although she and I (and my Best Reader) have several subjects of interest in common, things like, oh, Scripture, heresies and how to beat college students without leaving external marks. I am fond of these two, and it’s always nice for me when people of whom I am fond marry each other, making for happiness that increases by squares. Well, some people would call us all squares, but that’s neither here nor there.

Much of the weekend was spent with Old College Buddies and their spouses, some of whom are also Old College Buddies. There was also a large contingent of what one might call Younger College Buddies, that is, persons who went to college with people who went to college with people who went to college with YHB. Our social set has (or at least has had) some mechanisms for strengthening such links; there were people there from the class of seventy-cough and from the class of ought-sneeze. Well, and the early one is an outlier, but there were multiple representatives from the class of eighty-wheeze. And, not coincidentally, I suspect that at one point the majority of Gentle Readers here were in one room.

While YHB spent much of the weekend enjoying thinking about the Wedding (which was lovely and moving) and much of the weekend chasing after the Youngest Member (who was lovely and moving rather quickly), much of the weekend was also spent thinking about an Old High School Buddy who died earlier this week. This is a woman with whom I spent many happy hours in the High School theater world, and those of you who have done that know how pleasant such friendships can be. I have not seen her in twenty years and more, and will not now see her until the endtime, if ever. There is no longer a chance to catch up. This week I found out that she has three children and a loving husband; she won’t know how my life turned out, where I find my happiness.

It was a deliberate choice I made, after high school, cutting myself off from the friends I had made. I left town to go to college elsewhere, and felt that I would be happier, perhaps that I would be more free, severing those ties. And, frankly, keeping them was hard work, and to me hard work is something I prefer to leave to other people, who are so much better at it. So my Old High School buddies—the ones I ate lunch with five times a week, the ones I played cards with in Physics class, the ones I led at speech tournaments, the ones I rehearsed with and played with, the ones I bullshitted with and the ones I sang tipsy songs with, the one I went to Prom with and the one I asked to marry me, the one whose car had no air conditioning and the one who drove like a maniac, the one who was terrific with a pool cue and the one who could tap dance, the one I carried over my shoulder and the one I fell over on—were part of my past and not my present, and I have no idea what happened to any of them, except one that was particularly dogged about staying in touch.

Well, and another, who happens to have a blog, but we went to different high schools, so we are not technically Old High School Buddies. From good old Washington High School, home of the Rams, it’s just one fellow, and we average one telephone call a year.

Which is all fine. I have regrets about the decision, but I don’t know that it was the wrong one at the time, nor do I fool myself that the other decision, the one to keep in touch with some or most of the old gang, would have been without emotional cost. If I did try to fool myself that way, I would be reminded by events like this past weekend, where I am thrown back in to contact with people I know, or used to know, in social situations much like those we used to enjoy. And I like these people—let me be clear about this, I do like these people, without exception, my Old College Buddies, this is not a case where we are socializing now because of that connection but didn’t like each other at college or anything like that—and enjoy their company, and yet it is very difficult. It takes me a long time, some hours at least, before I can ease back into the old rhythms of conversation, and it takes me even longer to ease into new rhythms of new conversations.

Those are the ones that I really fully enjoyed. People talking about their current lives, their current thoughts and concerns and pleasures, the universes they perceive and how all of those universes match and how they don’t. Much of that was “talking shop”, the various academics talking about their departments and their students, because many of us who were impressionable at the same time were impressed in the same way, so many of us went down that long and winding road. And then, those of us with children (not as many as one might imagine) spent time talking about the universe those of us with children inhabit, with its dangers and frustrations and delights. But as I come home to central Connecticut, what seems to be sticking with me is not the facts or views of those people but just the sudden, almost revealed knowledge that I like these people, that they are not just of my past but of my present, and that they can be part of my future as well, not as I say without the cost of a good bit of awkwardness, even of hard work (dare I say it), but to the advantage of a stronger and deeper sense of myself.

And, eventually, when one of us is again struck down, suddenly or slowly, perhaps with a sense of grief unencumbered (or less encumbered) by that alienation from my own past.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

July 20, 2008

Stiff Upper Lip

Your Humble Blogger, as there is no particular reason for Gentle Readers to know, is a man with a moustache.

—Darling, there’s a man at the door with a moustache.
—Tell him I’ve already got one.
Boom Boom

I started growing a moustache as soon as I could, or in truth a few months sooner. I never looked forward to shaving; I looked forward to not shaving. Sadly, the beard thing never happened. In addition to coming in patchy, a moustache suits my face, a beard does not. I did grow a goatee—an echt goatee, not one of those imperials that are called goatees these days (although as a descriptivist, I am obliged to concede that since nobody other than YHB has worn what I would call a goatee in decades, and since the word is actually used by actual English speakers to refer to any beard (with or without a moustache) that doesn’t connect to the sidewhiskers, communication requires that the things called goatees are goatees, curse them all)—where was I? Oh, yes, I grew a goatee for a few months, for comic effect, but as it neither looked particularly good nor improved my morning ablutions, I gave up and shaved it off. My beard comes in dark and impressive down my throat, which is exactly where it should not be.

But the purpose of this note is not to gripe about my facial-hair situation, except to the extent that its purpose is to gripe about my facial-hair situation, as will be seen. You see, I am a man with a moustache. I like having a moustache, I think of myself as having a moustache, and for twenty years or so, the only times I have shaved my upper lip have been for the stage. As I shaved my upper lip on Friday morning.

The first set of publicity photos are set for Wednesday, so there was a terminus for the moustache, and my experience is that it is wise to give the raw skin a few days sunlight and air before starting with the greasepaint. Well, pancake. Nobody actually uses greasepaint anymore. And spirit gum; my mad Hrungarian has whiskers, as Shaw requires. Not the fluffy and luxurious sidewhiskers I think would be perfect for him, but I really don’t have time to deal with fluffy and luxurious sidewhiskers as I make the eight-minute change to Rich Alfie. Particularly as our Dear Director is trying to pick up the pace everywhere, so I may have only a seven-minute change…

It’s Whiskers that’s the problem. Alfie could have a moustache, but Whiskers must have a moustache, and therefore Alfie must not have a moustache, for the purposes of differentiating the two. And as it’s difficult for an actor with a moustache to play a character without a moustache (at least on stage), YHB must shave the lip for six weeks or so. Which is all right. Of all the inconveniences I have inflicted on myself to be in this show, the shaving ranks very low. Even counting washing out the washbasin.

However, it has been dispiriting how few people have noticed the change. My Best Reader noticed, of course, as did (eventually) a G.R. who was houseguest at the time. My Perfect Non-Reader when prodded, felt sure that I had shaved it off the previous day or even earlier. Co-workers failed to notice, or at least to comment, although many of my co-workers won’t see me until Monday. I had lengthy conversations with four of my Perfect Non-Reader’s friends’ parents, and short ones with two more, and none of them seemed to notice. Of the couple next door, the fellow gave me the business about it but his wife did not (although that doesn’t mean he noticed first). It seems in the mirror to be a radical change in appearance. If it isn’t, if it’s not something that people notice is missing, then maybe YHB is not, after all, a man with a moustache, just a man who happens to have a moustache?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

July 3, 2008

A Man's Home Is His Hassle

I should presumably be writing a nice Fourth-of-July note to put into the hopper for tomorrow, but I don’t have any ideas at the moment. If some idea strikes me, I may be able to post, but it will be a bit of a hassle, and it will be easy to post on Saturday (Chukat, Judges 11:1−33), so I probably will wait, and that whatever the idea is, it will have fled.

I could also write up a State of the Blog post, such as I used to do, month to month, but my notes are in a little thumb drive which I think is in the pocket of the waistcoat I was wearing yesterday. I hope that’s where it is. I could go through the trouble again of finding out that I had thirty-odd posts in June and ninety-odd comments, which is up five from May but down from thirty-glob posts in June of 2007. Or something. Frankly, that would be a hassle, too.

Is this a theme of hassle-avoidance? Perhaps it is. I have plenty of hassle in my life at present. Good hassle, but then this Tohu Bohu is good hassle, and it’s still hassle. At least I’m not behind on my Book Reports anymore, until I finish the one I’m nearly done with now.

Well, anyway. Have a happy Fourth of July. I hope you all, Gentle Readers, have just the right amount of hassle—not so little that you are absent from your family, friends and hobbies, but not so much that you are with them only to gripe and grouse. Enjoy the Independence of America.

Oh, and I’ll pass along an observation from a citizen of South Africa, resident in this country the last few years, who adores the Fourth of July. She points out that South Africa does not have any great national celebration day, splitting its national holidays between Reconciliation Day, Human Rights Day, Freedom Day and other such stupid (to use her word) holidays, most of which aren’t really celebrated by all the various ethnic, language and political groups. Which makes sense: the days largely commemorate the victory of one group over another within the country. In this nation of ours, the Fourth of July commemorates our Declaration of Independence, and aside from any resident Englishmen (or Welshmen, I suppose, if they feel that way about it) it wasn’t a victory over anybody here. Which may be nice to think about, as you watch the rockets’ red glare, and the cherry bombs, bursting, in air.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

June 21, 2008

Interview'd, fifth and last

The final question Matt Hulan asked in his interview was this:

You analyze faith, and more specifically the literature of the faith of your fathers, more than most people I know. Have you any ambition to become a rabbi? Have you ever had such an ambition?

Short answer: No. Long answer: Noooooooooooooooooo!

OK, proper answer: I like to spend time reading and discussing Scripture. If being a rabbi meant that people would pay me to sit around and read and discuss Scripture, I would be tempted. There are other parts of the job I would be willing to take on as well; I would happily write and deliver sermons (although not ones that would suit the congregation at any shul big enough to pay a rabbi), and would be willing to lead services, both by overseeing the contributions of congregants and by standing up on the bimah myself. The amount of fund-raising a rabbi has to do would be unpleasant for me, but I suspect it’s unpleasant for nearly all rabbis. Still, it’s starting to look less appealing as a job. Then there’s the administration of the congregation, the synagogue, the school. Sitting on committees. Finding volunteers. And then there are the pastoral duties: visiting the sick, comforting the perplexed, advising the cranky. No, not a job I would enjoy. And the hours suck, too.

There’s another thing, which is probably the most interesting, at least from the point of view of anyone who isn’t fascinated by my own taste in working conditions. I’m not a very observant Jew. I like to attend services. I love to study Scripture. I want to keep learning about how different Jews adopt and adapt different practices. But I don’t keep the commandments. Many of them I don’t keep because I don’t believe that keeping them is important to my relationships with the Divine and with my fellow Jews. I eat pork. I eat shellfish. I mix milk and meat. I mix wool and cotton. I am married to an Episcopalian, and I think that’s a Good Thing. I regularly violate certain sexual prohibitions, and I think that’s a Good Thing, too. Most Jews in America also violate dietary and sexual prohibitions, and many of them also believe that those dietary and sexual prohibitions are better broken, but—they want their rabbis to appear to follow them, and to publicly endorse them. Furthermore, there are a lot of such restrictions that I’m a bit ambivalent about, and people don’t want ambivalent rabbis. There are a lot of things that I would vaguely like to do (pray daily with t’fillin, for instance), that frankly, I can’t be arsed to, and people don’t want rabbis who are too lazy to pray. Which is quite right; I myself don’t want a rabbi as lazy as I am. Particularly not if it’s me.

So, no. I’ve never given any serious thought to becoming a rabbi. If I had more of a facility with languages, I’d consider learning Hebrew and then perhaps taking some classes, either at a Rabbinical school or (more likely) at a local university. I wouldn’t consider it very seriously, though; I’m a terrible student, and my desire to avoid taking classes is great. If I do go back to taking classes, it will be for something that will get me a job I want to have and keep and actually perform, not something that would utterly fail to get me a job which, if I were to somehow get it, would make me and my employers miserable.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

June 18, 2008

Interview'd, holding fourth

One of the good things about doing an interview the way I’m doing it is that I can interpret the questions however I like. F’r’ex, when Matt Hulan asks What is it about Elvis Costello?, rather than answering What is it about Elvis Costello that makes him such an asshole?, I can answer What is it about Elvis Costello that makes him so important to YHB personally? If you would like to try such interpretations for your own set of five questions, simply leave a twenty-pound note between the end of chapter two (The Detection of Leaks) and the beginning of chapter three (Checking the Thoroughness of Mixing) of any nearby copy of Radio Isotopes: A New Tool for Industry, by Sidney Jefferson. Or type a note in the comments, if that’s easier for you. Now, on to Elvis Costello.

Gentle Readers will no doubt be shocked to learn that Your Humble Blogger was a nerdy kid. Glasses, asthma, bad skin, special classes for the gifted, social ineptness, poor hand-eye co-ordination, ostracization, the whole bang shoot. And, of course, the rage, envy and self-loathing that is the birthright of the nerd, or at least of the male nerd (I suspect the female feels much the same, only worse). By the time I was in seventh or eighth grade, Elvis Costello was the outlet for those emotions. I listened to My Aim Is True over and over. A big old platter, on an enormous Hi-Fi system, usually alone in the house in the afternoon, or, if my mother were home, perhaps in my sister’s room on her more modern turntable. “Allison”, “Watching the Detectives” and “Mystery Dance” expressed the adolescent inferiority/superiority complex with an eloquence I could not, and with a frankness I could not reach, either. Particularly, this was a rock star who not only had glasses and pigeon toes but sang about a sexual life that existed primarily in twisted fantasies, where fulfillment wasn’t as easily imagined as revenge.

It’s cool now, I promise.

You know what? I’m going to go through the album song-by-song, just to bring back the ugly past:

  • Welcome to the Working Week: in my teens, this was a song about a boy whose girlfriend becomes famous, for some reason, and inadequate to the glossy life of a starlet’s boyfriend, and demoted to a sort of assistant/dogsbody. I don’t exactly know where all this came from, but that’s what I got.

  • Miracle Man: This, for me, was the song of a man who is losing his struggle with his urges. He’s got a crazy crush on a girl who sees him as just a friend; she teases him casually and he usually pretends not to care, but he’s reaching the breaking point.

  • No Dancing: This is a fellow who finally makes it to his girlfriend’s house, expecting to get lucky, but his clumsy advances are such a turn-off that she dumps him. Shudder.

  • Blame It On Cain: Just a crazy outsider rant. But fun.

  • Alison: Classic dark, jealous threat.

  • Sneaky Feelings: The boy in this one prefers his fantasies to the possible realities.
  • (The Angels Wanna Wear My) Red Shoes: Another unrequited love story, but with perhaps the Best Ever line: I said “I’m so happy I could die”/She said “Drop dead” then left with another guy. This is the inevitable result of transitory happiness for this frame of mind. Or, perhaps, when anyone is fourteen.

  • Less Than Zero: Er, about fascism. Worth bringing up the other point, which is that Elvis Costello songs were not just about sexual longing and inferiority, they were about sexual longing and inferiory expressed in erudite terms. You know, for nerds.

  • Mystery Dance: In this song, the boy is not only clumsy, but actually ignorant of the mechanics of sex, for extra humiliation.

  • Pay It Back: Here, the boy is putting up a hard front, until the line Until the lights went out, I didn’t know what to do/If I could fool myself, then maybe I’d fool you too, which brings us back to the previous song’s humiliation.

  • I’m Not Angry: Oh, yes he is. And jealous. Another is-she-really-going-out-with-him song.

  • Waiting for the End of the World: This song is more the aloof nerd, the one who is just better than the circumjacent yahoos, and a little bit afraid of them, too.

  • Watching the Detectives: Although it isn’t clear whether the boy in this song is only fantasizing about kidnapping the object of his pathetic crush or whether he has done it, it’s still creepy. Wonderfully creepy.

I think that’s the whole album that I had on vinyl. I could probably sing the whole thing through, word for word, right now (except for the mondegreens, since the album came without a lyrics sheet, and I learned the words off the Singing Dictionary much later and the intellectual knowledge hasn’t replaced the muscle memory of singing the wrong words), and—and this is really important—hum most of the bass lines and guitar solos and tap out the drum parts on a table top. Because in addition to the whole emotional thing, these are really good songs. The lyrics are witty, and funny in places, and powerful, and the tunes are catchy, memorable and enjoyable.

And then there are the other nineteen albums. Mr. Costello (or Mr. MacManus, to use his proper name) has put out a lot of great music, over my entire adult life. He was the first recording artist that I ever sought out information on when a new album was coming out to go and buy it as soon as it was available. Back when they were on big black plates, you know. Actually, the first album I bought on CD I bought was Imperial Bedroom, to replace the cassette that was worn out, and besides cut off partway through “Town Cryer”. That was, coincidentally or not, the first CD I damaged and had to replace. Ah, well. I walked four miles to buy Spike on the first day it was out. Well, it’s more accurate to say that I wandered around Philadelphia lost for an hour until I blundered my way to the Tower Records on South Street, but I was headed there to buy Spike. I have grown less obsessed over time (as I have grown more complacent with my own life), and I haven’t got around to getting the new album, yet. Plus, over the last ten years or so, I’ve started to resent him for being an asshole. But whenever I hear a new album, I want to like it, because that first one was so important to me, way back when.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

June 15, 2008

Interview'd, third time's the charm

In this third response to five questions from Matt Hulan (don’t forget, you can claim your five questions from Your Humble Blogger by shouting “It ain’t rocket psychiatry!” into a metal pail, or by asking nicely. Or why not go to the source?), Your Humble Blogger was given a choice of recounting the sweetest story of either the birth of the Youngest Member, the birth of my Perfect Non-Reader, or the story of how I met my Best Reader. The first two are properly my Best Reader’s stories to tell—that is, I was there and all, but if I leave out all the medical details that are properly hers to decide to reveal or not, there isn’t much to the story at all. Those who really want to know might enjoy the blog of the Punitive Sibling.

The story of how my Best Reader and I met, though, is an excellent story, and definitely worth telling. This is my story of it, of course, and will differ in some particulars from hers.

It begins with my arrival at college. Well, no, I tell a lie, it begins with the next day; people traveling a long way were allowed to arrive the night before the dorms officially opened, and I got in late (particularly with a three-hour time difference) and tired and pretty much collapsed into bed. I met my roommate the next day. We got along very well; Cigus Vanni, erstwhile Swarthmore Dean and Jeopardy! champ, had done quite a good job of putting us together. We fell out, later, which happens a lot, but I imagine we were both fairly difficult roommates, and we did OK.

And now I’ll go back even further, to explain that I am one of those people that is simultaneously extroverted and shy. When I am feeling comfortable, I enjoy “working a room”, but toss me in a room full of people I don’t know, and unless I’ve got some sort of structure or scheme for getting comfortable, I’m likely to stand off to one side and never meet anyone. In high school, it had taken me a long time to achieve a sort of comfort with my classmates. I never became popular, in any sense, but I became high-profile, which suited me as well; I rarely went into a room full of people I didn’t know, and often went into rooms full of people who knew me and were happy to see me. Or so it seemed to me, I suppose they may not have been. Anyway, when I arrived at a campus I had never seen before, and at which I knew no-one whatsoever, I was determined that rather than stand off to one side and never meet anyone, I would face the matter bravely and meet as many people as possible in that first orientation week, and get it the hell over with.

I managed to convince my roommate to go in with me on this, as it’s easier to be socially brave with two than one, particularly since we had hit it off very well on that first day. So we happened on a maneuver that worked well for us: we would walk up to clusters of other lost-looking freshman and introduce, not ourselves, but each other. Hello, I would say, this is J---. Or the other way around. We met a lot of people that way, both people we became friends with and others that we didn’t. I should add that our college class was around 300 people or so; what with all the orientation activities, it wasn’t that hard to meet a high percentage of them in a few days.

One of those orientation activities was the Mugging, which I believe still occurs. The Alumni Office begins their relationship with us alums-to-be by giving us each a mug that says I was mugged by the Alumni Office, and hosts an afternoon party. That year, the Mugging was on the lawn in front of Parrish Hall. My roommate and I were walking around together, as we were in the habit of doing already, and I saw a woman sitting on the steps of Parrish Hall all by herself. We went over to her, one of us introduced the other, and we started chatting. She turned out to be quite nice. In fact, within, oh, five minutes or so, we were fast friends, and have remained so (brief quarrels notwithstanding) for twenty-one years come September.

And that’s the story.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

Pick One, beat the other to death with a stick

OK, Your Humble Blogger is being dragged off to Fathers’ Day frivolity. In principle, I am against Fathers’ Day as a Hallmark Holiday that encourages consumerism and whatnot, but in practice, I find I’m growing fond of it.

So, as I just have a moment, I propose a Fathers’ Day poll for Gentle Readers, those who are fathers, those who have fathers, those who think they have heard of this father thing somewhere:

Struvvelpeter or Punch and Judy?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

June 14, 2008

Having a stroke

Just as a matter of curiosity, do any of y’all know why the American abbreviation for air-conditioning is A/C with a slash? It would be bizarre to see air/conditioning, but we expect A/C, and I use that more naturally than I use A.C. or AC. Wikipedia’s entry on the slash reminds me that b/w, i/o and O/O are also abbreviations that introduce the slash mark where there was none before. What’s up w/dat?

Also, just to check: YHB uses air conditioning solely to refer to cooling, that is, making a car or room less warm, and uses heating to refer to making it warmer. A unit designed to condition air (vaddevah dat means) without changing its temperature would be a ventilator, or a humidifier or dehumidifier, if that were it’s main purpose, or an air filter (or filtration system if I were feeling office-speak-y). Or, you know, a fan. But an A/C unit is for cooling, right? Or is this not the common use?

In part, I’m curious because my Prius appears to use air conditioning to mean the whole process of fan and filter and heat and cool. The button is marked climate, but the dash says A/C on if the heater is working. This seems wrong to me. Does it seem wrong to y’all?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

June 13, 2008

Interview'd, a second go

Your Humble Blogger is in the process of answering five questions from GR Matt Hulan. To no-one’s surprise, the answers will be long, and have little to do with the questions. Any Gentle Reader who wants a turn on the grill should let me know; the requirement is that you respond to the questions and then offer your own skills as an Inquisitor to all and sundry.

So, the first two questions, were, essentially, when you blog about reading books in the blink of a proverbial, do you cheat or are you Just That Fast? And how do you do it? The first answer was that I cheat. The second is that I am Just That Fast.

Well, and not quite That Fast, but quite fast enough. I had never timed myself, but to answer your question, I decided to experiment. For my first time trial, I picked up a often-read book, The Chosen, an old paperback copy, and opened it at random. It was the first time that Reuven meets Reb Saunders: the evening service to end Shabbat, and the lecture with the two mistakes, one for Danny and one for Reuven. A wonderful bit. I started on page 108, and I stopped on page 134, at the end of the lecture (but before we go upstairs with Reb Saunders and the boys). It took eight minutes. At 26 pages for 8 minutes, I get something like eighteen and a half seconds per page. The book is 270 pages long; call it 90 minutes total for the book? A nice long bath. It seems a bit fast to me, actually; I suspect it would take more like two hours. The next trial was with a novel I am reading for the first time, People of the Book, a hardback. I started on page 281 and stopped on page 297, after eleven minutes. Call it thirty-seven seconds a page. Four hours for the whole book, assuming a constant rate (which wouldn’t happen). Last trial: I read eight pages of Isaiah Berlin’s “Political Ideas in the Twentieth Century” in Four Essays on Liberty, which took eleven minutes. Which I thought was a pretty good clip. At that rate, it would take me an hour or so just to finish that essay, and five hours to finish the book. Which is preposterous, not only because I doubt I could read the essay for an hour without stopping, but because I clocked myself on the first eight pages, which are introductory in nature and require very little going back to check what I’m reading now against what I thought I read in the last bit.

Anyway, is that fast? I suspect it is. I don’t really have a sense of it. If there are, say 350 words on a page of the novel (are there? I have no idea), I’m reading something like 600 words a minute for new stuff. TSOR tells me the average is 250 or so; so I evidently read at least twice the average speed. So I read quickly. I’m not a speed reader, but I do read very quickly.

How do I do it? I have no idea. I have no particular training in it, other than years and years and years spent reading. I do have what I think of as a quick mind. I type fairly quickly (around 50wpm, 12,000 kph 10-Key). My memory works very quickly indeed, when it works at all, which is very often, actually. I’m not a terribly deep thinker, or a creative one, but I am pretty quick. Growing up with quick siblings encouraged that quickness, at least in conversation. So in general, I think I read quickly because I think quickly.

I also must have trained myself to read quickly, simply to read as much as possible. In particular, I remember trying to finish books (or at least a chapter) before having to go to bed. Now, I hated to go to bed (I was an insomniac from an early age, worse luck), so some of that may have been staving off bedtime. I have a distinct memory of having two minutes (or some such) before my bedtime, and asking if I could read for that interval, being granted permission, and then being discovered on the sofa with my book half-an-hour or more later. But it wasn’t all a delaying tactic. I was also one of those flashlight-under-the-blanket readers, trying to finish the book before I got caught. I suspect some of my techniques for reading quickly, such as they are, I developed when I was seven or so, and trying to get to a stopping place before I had to stop.

One result of reading as quickly as I do is that if I am attempting to analyze a speech (remember when I used to do that?), I find it frustrating to slow down and listen to it delivered. I read transcripts rather than listening to or watching debates. Often, if Left Blogovia is abuzz about some video or other, I will find a transcript if I can, and if I can’t, sometimes I’ll just give it a miss altogether. The broadband breakthrough, the prevalence of YouTube and other video clips, and the wide availability of analysis on-line is cool, but I appreciate the theory and then go back to my text. Just a preference on my part.

Which I guess brings up one more thing to mention about my reading speed, which is that for a long time I thought that because I read faster than other people, I was smarter than other people. This is an easy mistake, but a problematic one. It’s more so because, since I both read faster and spend more time reading than many other people, and because of my trick memory I retain more of what I read than most other people, I have a greater store of information in my head than most people. Most of the information is useless trivia, true, but people are easily impressed by useless trivia. And I am, too, of course. I spent most of my teenage years impressed with my store of useless trivia, and I can’t honestly claim to be totally over it, even now. Still, I am not that smart. I’m OK, I have my strengths, and certainly it’s good to have a nice big memory store, but my ration of good ideas to bad ones is, frankly, not what I would want it to be. Which is a good thing to keep in mind, when I brag about my hundred books a year.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

Interview'd, part the first

It having been a while since Your Humble Blogger was last beaten with a meme stick, Your Humble Blogger signed on to 5 Questions from Matt Hulan. The way this works is simple:

Anyone who wants me to interview them leaves a comment on this note so indicating. I come up with five questions. That person posts the questions answers on their own blog, should they be embloggened, or should they be disembloggened for whatever reason posts the answers as a further comment in this Tohu Bohu. In addition to the answers, however, the interviewee must agree to become the interviewer in turn, offering (as YHB is now) to ask five questions of anyone so inclined, and they’ll tell two friends, and they’ll tell two friends, and so on, and so on, ad infinitum, to the world’s end, amen.

Having asked Matt for five of the best, I promptly forgot all about it, but he reminded me, so without further ado, or with only a trifle of further ado, really barely worthy of the name ado at all, when you think about it, herewith the five:

  1. You seem to read extraordinarily quickly, even by my standards. I’ve been known to read a novel in the space of a day, even an afternoon, but you’ve mentioned reading a novel in the space of a bath. Do you cheat, or are you Just That Fast?
  2. Assuming that the answer to #1 is that you cheat, how do you cheat? Assuming that the answer to #1 is that you’re Just That Fast, what is your page rate, and how did you come to develop such speed?
  3. Choose the sweetest of these three story options and tell it:
    • The story of how you met Your Best Reader
    • The story of Your Perfect Non-Reader’s birth
    • The story of the Youngest Member’s birth
  4. What is it about Elvis Costello?
  5. You analyze faith, and more specifically the literature of the faith of your fathers, more than most people I know. Have you any ambition to become a rabbi? Have you ever had such an ambition?

And the answer to the first question is—wait for it—no, really, this isn’t hard to guess, shall we all say it together? It’s more complicated than that. First of all, I take really long baths. Seriously. Forty-five minutes is a quick bath for me; an hour and a quarter is a decent soak. I likes to submerge me into hot water. So, there’s that. Then my description of my reading habits is misleading. I do take books into the tub, but I rarely finish them in one bath. More usually, a Bathtub Book will be started as I commence to bathe, and then put aside at the end of the tub to be picked up at bedtime, or such later time as I have for reading. Usually bedtime, for those books. For a Dick Francis, for instance, or a Lois McMaster Bujold, I will read for, say, an hour or so in the tub, then another half-hour or more in bed, and then again at bedtime the next day, and then perhaps a stolen chunk of time in the morning— let's call it three hours altogether. Not much more. A long book may wind up in more than one bath, a few days apart. And I don’t mention how long it takes me to finish books, particularly when it does take me a long time. I’ve been reading Aubrey’s Brief Lives in bits and kibbles for months, now. It took me at least three months to complete The Story is True. I had to renew The Staging of Romance in Late Shakespeare from ILL, and then had to essentially skim the last chapter because I ran out of time, and I still turned it in a day late. So this image of me frequently picking up a nice thick book, settling into the tub, and emerging clean and shampooed and finished with the book a half-hour later is false.

Also, I cheat. With rereads, I will on occasion skip bits of description or paragraphs of narration that I mostly remember. I am a very lazy reader. I don’t skip full pages, but I will let my eyes pass lightly along clumps of verbiage until I get to the next interesting bit. I also cheat because I have a trick memory, so when I have read a book before, I often know it very well on the second time through, and so can read it very fast indeed, essentially skimming over the bits that I don’t feel like slowing down for. I also cheat by reading books that are not very dense, books that are plot-heavy and description-light. And books written for teenagers and tweens, I read a lot of those, too. All of that contributes to my hundred books a year or so.

I suppose that’s the answer to the second question, as well, except that, because it’s more complicated than that, there’s another answer, which is that I really am Just That Fast at reading. And I’ll talk about that in the next note. In the meantime, any Gentle Readers who want to answer five questions from YHB, and who are willing to ask five to any passer-by who passes, er, by, should request five from me, and I will do my best to provoke and inspire. Gannet (and Duck, who doesn’t comment much these days, if she still reads) may take a second bite at the apple, should they so desire; after all, questions are free.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

May 30, 2008

A Bad Dream

I had a nightmare last night.

In my dream, I had been a political prisoner. I don’t think that I dreamed the imprisonment itself, or if I did, I don’t remember it. Thank the Divine. The part of the dream I do remember is my attempt to adjust back to freedom. Or, rather, the attempt by my friends and family to help me adjust. I had clearly been abused while in prison, and had somehow betrayed other people by giving information. In reality, of course, I have no information that would have interested my captors, but then, that presumably would have only made things worse.

Physically, I was very weak. I walked slowly, and leaned on support when it was available. My appetite was bad enough to be a source of concern for my family, and in fact a source of conflict, as I stubbornly refused to eat. I was also emotionally weak, for want of a better description. I wept frequently, and silently. I cowered at loud noises. I spoke very quietly; clearly I had been conditioned not to raise my voice.

In the dream, I was at a gathering, perhaps a college reunion, because a lot of my old college were there, along with (as happens in dreams) people I knew from other parts of my life. It was in a sort of resort camp in a wooded, hilly area, with a stream and a waterfall, and trails though tall trees. I remember being overwhelmed by the beauty of the area, weeping at it, and being unable to stop weeping. I also remember seeing, at a distance, other people surrounded by their friends and family, and knowing that they, too, were released prisoners, and wondering if I had been responsible for their imprisonment.

Mostly, I remember the terrible feeling of shame, combined with (or perhaps caused by) my terrible weakness. My family and friends clearly sympathized; nobody blamed me, or (as far as I remember, now that I’m awake) talked about the years in prison at all. There was, I think, a conversation about the political change that had led to freeing the political prisoners, but I don’t remember any details.

Anyway, it was just a dream.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

April 15, 2008

One up, one down, then one to the ri-i-i-i-ight

Your Humble Blogger recently read Potter on Supermanship, and the idea expressed in the work at Yeovil of being one-up or one-down has stuck with me. It’s amazing how big a role one-up-ness plays in our lives.

Some of it is spending a fair amount of time with young children, five to seven years old or so, for whom one-up-ness is hugely important. If a five-year-old can catch out an adult saying lunch when what is meant is breakfast, well, that’s a five-year-old that is one-up on an adult, and how often does that happen?

Actually, it happens all the time, at least to me. Sometimes it is deliberate. My primary method for entertaining such children is making easily catchable mistakes, such as substituting the word moose for whatever nouns in a sentence can be inferred. Such hilarity! Ah, well.

Children, of course, are so rarely one-up on adults that I find it easy to forgive them their glee in such one-up-ness as they can temporarily grasp. Well, and children are naturally one-up in games and sports, in that an adult’s victory over a child makes the adult one-down among his adult peers. But in life, in choices of dinner entrees and schools and entertainment, of bedtime and clothing and hairstyle, in leisure activities and chores and family time, children are so utterly and thoroughly one-down that the temporary (and often fictional) one-down-ness of adults is understandably savored.

It’s less appealing in adults.

No, no, let’s be clear: there is a difference between winning and being one-up. Just as an adult who scores off a six-year old goalie is one-down, so is the winner or loser of a contest often irrelevant to one-up-ness. Winning can be appealing in an adult, as can exulting in victory. Gloating, not so much.

But just as the work at the Institute moved from Gamesmanship to Lifeitselfmanship, one-up-ness and one-down-ness infiltrates much more of our lives than games. In fact, I find it much easier to forgive a friend who gloats over victory at Fluxx or Word-O-Rama than to forgive one who gloats at a victory in grammar or argument. Nor is it entirely, or even mostly a matter of simple victories of that kind. No, most one-up-ness (as the work of the Institute makes clear) is a matter of off-hand remark, in-joke, snark, primness or vulgarity, self-righteousness or self-pity, put-downs and put-offs and put-asides.

If it helps, here are some thoughts on the topic: It’s OK to be wrong. When somebody corrects you, you win, because you have improved your knowledge and the other person has not. It’s OK for other people to be wrong, even on the internet. If somebody assumes you know something that you don’t know, they made the mistake. But don’t let them feel one-down, because that’s not nice.

It’s OK to be on the outside. It’s OK to like popular music; it’s OK if other people don’t like the unpopular music that you like. Same with movies. And books. And art. And people. Other people’s ignorance of your favorite people, art, books, movies and music is neither a criticism of your taste nor a character flaw. They can continue in their ignorance without being one-down, or they can gain exposure without anyone else going one-up.

Everybody—everybody—is born one-up. If anybody’s one-up-ness makes you one-down, then keep in mind that there are more of them than there are of you.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

April 3, 2008

Heads!

I’ve noticed that my Perfect Non-Reader, when she attempts to catch a ball, by instinct brings her hand up and out toward the ball, rather than moving her hand with the ball as it comes to her. This is one reason why such attempts so rarely succeed. Another reason is that her body and head generally flinch away from the ball, and then she also closes her eyes fairly often as well. Not really very good at catch, my Perfect Non-Reader, but she reads well and does arithmetic like a champion.

I tried to explain about moving your hand with the ball as it comes to you. I may have been successful at imparting the concept. I was certainly unsuccessful at improving her rate of success.

I don’t think I ever had a real problem catching a ball that was thrown right to me. I have horrible depth perception, though, so a ball thrown on an arc from any distance is a mystery to me. I was a terrible outfielder in Little League, and am still a terrible outfielder when I make the rare attempt. I have soft(ish) hands, but I have trouble getting to the ball. And I’m slow and have a lousy arm.

My arm isn’t quite as lousy as it was when I was a kid, though, largely because when I was in high school I finally figured out follow-through. Mostly as applied to bowling, but I was able to see how it worked more generally, which improved my throwing, batting, and pool playing as well. I’m not sure how I managed to get to sixteen or so without getting follow-through, but then, I expected myself to be lousy at sports, so I attributed my lousiness at sports to my asthma, nearsightedness and, I’m afraid, my verbal and mathematical ability (as if it was a trade-off, and people who were good at sports had to be slow-witted, which was observably untrue—some people are slow and some are quick, some are bright and others dim, some are big and others small, and some people are quick and bright and big, and some people are slow and dim and small, and even the slow, dim small ones have a spark of the Divine fire, but try telling that to me when I was ten years old, if you want to waste your time travel). And to be sure a good deal of my lousiness at sports was due to my asthma, nearsightedness and meager size, but some was due to my not learning how best to use what height, eyesight and wind I had.

I don’t think much of the theory of multiple intelligences as cognitive science, but it does seem to be a good source of vocabulary for talking about people being different, one to another. Whether kinesthetic intelligence is an actual thing or not, I imagine it’s clear when I say I am kinesthetically stupid; my body does not, on the whole, do exactly what I want it to. I can’t draw a straight line, for instance, nor kick a ball with any real aim, nor navigate through a room without bumping into the furniture three or four times out of ten. But just because I read quickly and easily, I don’t think it takes any great wit to be able to read, and just because other people are dextrous and strong doesn’t mean I can’t catch a ball that’s thrown at me. And, in fact, in my teenage years, I learned to juggle, spending hours and hours and hours throwing a ball from one hand to the other until it usually went where I wanted it to.

I don’t care if my Perfect Non-Reader learns to juggle. I would like her to overcome her kinesthetic stupidity to the extent of being able to catch and throw, and sometimes hit a ball with a bat. Mostly, I don’t want her to believe, as I did, that her kinesthetic handicap prevents her from reaching that level, because it doesn’t, unless she lets it.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

March 9, 2008

Daylight under your toes

Your Humble Blogger was thinking about writing a note extolling Daylight Savings Time, but it turns out that I wrote that note a long time ago. So that’s that.

Still, while I was looking for that note (which I had only the vaguest memory of writing), I noticed that this will be only the fifth time Your Humble Blogger has used the word daylight in a note on this Tohu Bohu. Once I described when somebody saw me in daylight (after seeing me under stage lights), once about cricket, once describing a (fictional) robbery, and now twice discussing Daylight Savings.

Clearly I do not use enough daylight. Whatever am I saving it for?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

February 24, 2008

Five Years On

It is five years today since My Gracious Host made the announcement that essentially opened up this Tohu Bohu. I had been blogging for a couple of weeks, just to get the hang of it and see if it was something I realio trulio wanted to do, but then, a week or two before Jed set me up with the blog database, I noodled around with writing blog-entry-type notes in a word processor, so it’s hard for me to put a better natal date to this thing than 24 Feb 2003. So. Five years.

Sadly, what I was on about five years ago was the potential invasion of Iraq by a US-led coalition under the aegis of the United Nations. I was (“reluctantly”) in favor of such an invasion, although I rescinded my support later. Well, I don’t want to dwell on it. It was five years ago, and oh shit can you believe we’re still fighting over there?

Sorry.

Anyway, one thousand six hundred and thirty-nine entries, not all of which sucked. Someday I should think about going back and writing that first entry.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

December 31, 2007

from the french aguillanneuf, or in the norman dialect hoguinané.

Happy Cake Day, Gentle Readers. Today is the last day of the year, so you have just a few more hours to do whatever it was that you meant to do this year, but didn’t get around to actually doing. Or you could do it next week sometime. No rush.

Your Humble Blogger tends to do a lot of year-end considering and measuring. What kind of a year was it? Am I a better person than I was a year ago? A better blogger? A better husband? A better friend? A better father?

And I do that several times a year. Cake Day, of course, and the Days of Awe, equally of course, and there’s my birthday also, and the wedding anniversary, and the end of the school year, and there is a loved-one’s birthday in February that sparks such talk, and another in the summer, and another in the fall. Which makes the yearly self-evaluation kind of strange, because I’ve done one just a few months ago, and most of the things I’ve done in the last year I had done the last time I self-evaluated, and although sometimes I do evaluate those actions somewhat differently a month or two later, mostly not so much. You know?

There is the whole year-end list thing, and I’m going to make a fair try at getting caught up on my Book Reports by midnight (four left, although I’m pretty sure I’m forgetting some) so I can make my Annual List of Ten or Eleven Books YHB Enjoyed Reading This Year tomorrow or the next day. I don’t list movies until February or March, in case I catch a couple of 2007 movies in early 2008, and I don’t know that I’ll list movies this year at all, since, not so many this year. I haven’t even got out to Sweeney, and it doesn’t look like I’m going to get to it on the big screen. Ah, well. As for new music, well, let’s not be silly. My favorite sides of 2007 are likely to be my favorite sides of 2006, and probably twelve of the top twenty were in the list for 1997 (had I made such a list).

Which is all right. I read a lot of new books, and reread old ones. I don’t listen to a lot of new music, but a listen to a lot of old music. I don’t watch very many new movies, but I watch a fair number of old ones I haven’t seen before. I blog. I forget to make telephone calls. Sometimes I get a decent night’s sleep. I show up at work on time. I sing to my children, whether they like it or not. I miss my friends who live far away. I gripe a lot. I make mistakes. I do clever things. I dance when no-one is looking.

I doubt very much that any of that will change a whole lot, between one Cake Day and the next. I suppose the difference is that some years, there’s cake, and some years there’s Crème Brulée.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

December 19, 2007

That's what Youth Culture is, these days

Your Humble Blogger does not wear T-Shirts, but I would totally buy a T-Shirt with the slogan Blackwater Shot Our Dog. I know plenty of people who would wear it. Although, you know, my is funnier. Or include the source: New York Times: Blackwater Shot Our Dog in the headline font they use. Maybe on the back, it could say w00f.

Anyway, Your Humble Blogger is unlikely to write anything very long and clever in the next, oh, let’s just say through the end of the year. I’m sick, and I’m tired, and I’m distracted, and I’m traveling, and I’m cranky. So. Expect a barrage of Short Takes, and feel free to use the comments to talk about whatever is interesting these days to people who are interested in things. Smoke ’em if you got ’em, just don’t shoot the dog.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

November 22, 2007

fourth thursday

It seems that Your Humble Blogger has not developed a Tohu Bohu Thanksgiving Tradition. Well, and mostly, the tradition has been not posting anything, because I’m all doing things, eating things, and washing things.

Now, however, Your Humble Blogger can cheat. I can set entries in advance. My Election Day presentation of Mr. Whitman’s marvelous poem was slotted in a few days beforehand, like a little time bomb (or time blog), set to go off on the day. That was just in case I forgot. Well, and so that it would post in the morning, whilst I was busy, you know, voting. So I could set something up to post itself on cue, all the same as Election Day, Armistice Day and Memorial Day. But I don’t have any ideas.

I am disinclined to do an annual list of Things For Which To Be All Thankful For And Stuff. As I mentioned at one point, I’m thankful for the bad stuff, too; I’m just happy to be here. I could find poems of thanksgiving and praise, I suppose. I don’t know. I’m not going to post favorite recipes, because I don’t think about recipes enough to have favorites, except for a very tiny handful, which would run out too quickly to make a ToBoThanksTrad. I have given up on my brilliant Oscars game, so I can’t open up the game season with a Thanksgiving post.

I got nuttin’. I’m not even here.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

October 27, 2007

Miles Tones

This note, if my software is counting correctly, and there’s no reason to assume it is, will become the 1,500th note in this Tohu Bohu. That works out to an average of six a week for the four-and-three-quarters years that Your Humble Blogger has been Humbly Blogging.

My 100th note, it turns out, was about Dennis Prager. Back in those days, I was having Eleana Benador email me right-wing columns to keep up with what was going on. I don’t know when that stopped, but it was a long time ago. Now the links from that entry are dead. Ah, well. Let’s go on.

My 200th note came as I was moving residences and internet service providers, and is memorable mostly because YHB forgot to give it a title, so Mine Gracious Host had to step in for me. My 300th note was a Book Report on Ten and a Kid, a lovely book by Sadie Rose Weilerstein that I would like to reread, now that I’ve been reminded of it. My 400th note is the first appearance of Barack Obama, a rather critical analysis of his keynote speech at DNC2004. My 500th note is a Parshah prep about Chaye Sarah. My 600th note is primarily a rant about the use of the word meme, but also contains a (still valid) offer to rant on any topic of a Gentle Reader’s choosing. My 700th note is a Book Report on Villa Incognito, which (like my 600th note) contains an egregious error. My 800th note was an unsuccessful attempt to find out if Gentle Readers who are sports fans enjoy their All-Star Games. My 900th note was an excellent example of the ways my Book Reports often fail to report on the book they purport to. My 1,000th note is an embarrassed little shrug about my arrogant ignorance of popular culture (specifically Harrison Ford flicks). It would have been nice if my thousandth entry were something cool, such as the beginning of the Liaisons stuff or a wonderful guest post by my Best Reader. My 1,100th post is about intolerance and proselytizing in a small town in Delaware. My 1,200th post is Pure Drivel, or at least a Book Report on the work of that name. My 1,300th post is about feedback in the system of politics, policy and personality. My 1,400th post is a set of three things I didn’t have time to write about. And my 1,500th entry is one of those dumb navel-gazing entries that can’t get its head out of its own tailspin.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

October 18, 2007

from blue to orange

Gentle Readers all, settle in for a bit of a shift. By the kind hands of Mine Gracious Host, this Tohu Bohu is going to undergo a bit of a change. Most of y’all will experience it as a purely cosmetic change, I hope not an unpleasant one. I hope you like orange.

The big news about the change, though, is that at long last Your Humble Blogger has decided to give in and have a feed. Enjoy. I hope that you all still read the site in your browsers and continue to (or start to) comment; the reason I’ve been reluctant to institute the feed business is because I want you here, commenting, not on some aggregator, reading. But you can get here from your aggregator, when you have something to say, which I hope is often.

Don’t make me regret this.

The other thing I’ve added is a list of Potential Notes, which should be sites that I’ve noticed and set aside for possibly writing about. My hope is that the list right up front where I can’t miss it will spark me to write about them, but my other hope is that (1) some Gentle Reader will shoot me an email expressing an actual interest in my writing about one of them, now and then, or (b) some Gentle Reader will be sufficiently interested in one of them to write about it over at their place, thus saving me the trouble. We’ll see how it works. Once the thing appears (on the sidebar on the right, if all goes well and the creek don’t rise), feel free to use it however you like.

As you should the rest of the site, really. I’m in it for the comments, as I think I’ve said before, but y’all should be in it for ... well, what are you in it for?

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

January 1, 2007

Also, there was a trip to the No Such Thing store, where we purchased the self-spreading peanut butter

Well, and Your Humble Blogger has returned, as promised. Since my last post, I have eaten chicken, pork, ham, shrimp, goose, venison, lamb, goat and some unidentifiable form of fish. Also some sausages that by rights ought to have been pork. Oh, and I suppose I have had a very small amount of beef, in the form of a highly spiced sausage sliced very thin and placed on top of a pizza.

And some vegetables.

And chocolate. Rather a lot of chocolate, really.

Also I watched much more broadcast television than usual, including several quiz shows. I think I may just possibly have figured out Deal or No Deal, which is a sort of Beckett quiz show, where the form of the quiz show remains, but all the questions and answers are removed, and time slows down, and the viewer enters a sort of perceptual netherworld where action of any kind appears impossible, at least until after the commercial break. It is interesting to me, though, that it is the only show I’ve ever seen that openly acknowledges that the break for commercials is an unpleasant chore to be finished before one can watch the show again. On the other hand, the commercials were often far more entertaining than the show, so where are you. Family Feud, on the other hand, is a far more interesting and challenging way to utterly waste a half-hour that will never come back.

As for the New Year, well, as Michael says, this is the Year the Lord made, and it’s too late to give it back.

Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.

May 23, 2006

Question and comment

A question for my Gentle Readers: How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood? No, wait, that’s not the question. Your Humble Blogger knows the answer to that one: A woodchuck would chuck all the wood he could chuck, if a woodchuck could chuck wood.

No, the question is: what is the proper word for that exchange? It’s not a riddle, and it’s not, properly speaking a joke, either. My Perfect Non-Reader called it a joke, but there’s no real joke in it. And it sounds like a pun, but there isn’t actually a pun in it after all, is there? Is it a tongue-twister? If so, it’s a spectacularly easy one to say, not at all like the story about Betty and her bit of butter or Peter and his pickled peppers. If not, well, what is it?

While you’re chewing on that, Gentle Readers, I will inform you that this Tohu Bohu no longer takes comments to entries more than 30 days old. YHB is weary of deleting spam, particularly the comment that “I think the man should be given a medal for having more balls than all the Democracts combined.” Since that comment (with a variety of links to a variety of sites) seems to be frequently attached to either (a) my Report on Jimmy Carter’s book (and I know he isn’t a Democract, but he certainly is a Democrat, and although ballsy enough in his own way (as is Roz, to be fair) not ballsier than, say, Charlie Rangel and Kathleen Sebelius combined, much less all the rest of us), or (2) my musings on Valmont’s possible fading prowess (and the Vicomte is not a Democract or a Democrat, nor yet a democrat nor even a republican, and although the man has, in some sense, huevos, it seems a odd extrapolation from that particular aspect of his character, if you follow me, to emphasize).

At any rate, if you are moved to comment on something very old, send me an email, and I will ... well, I’ll read it, that’s what I’ll do. And then I’ll see. Probably I’ll make a new post incorporating your email, but perhaps I’ll find a way to incorporate it into the old thread. Email me, anyway.

chazak, chazak, v’nitchazek,
-Vardibidian.

October 3, 2005

State of the Blog

Well, and it’s State of the Blog time again. Since the last time I totted up the notes, I had the big move in July (17 notes) and August (26 notes), and then bounced up a bit higher than normal with 37 notes. Books remained fairly steady (7 in July, 13 in August, and 13 in September), which indicates that if I’m not blogging, I’m still reading. Maybe I read more when I don’t blog. Maybe that’s preferable.

Anyway, the big SotB news was September’s comment explosion, with 142 comments from 18 different Gentle Readers, not counting my own comments (42 of those) or the 134 spam comments I deleted. However I count it, that’s a record for this Tohu Bohu. I think my previous high was 121 (in December 2004) which would have included my own comments and any odd spam. I didn’t have much spam back then, though.

Jed (thank you) made a nice little change in the way I receive comment notification in July, which allowed my to separate out spam and self-commenting in tracking, and encourages me to spend even more time examining numbers. In July, by the way, there were 58 real comments and 24 spam comments; in August, there were 40 real comments, 11 self-comments, and one hundred and sixty-two spam comments.

The other news of note in TohuBohuville is that for (I believe) the first time, this Tohu Bohu has been put onto a blogroll. That is, I do have some very nice old college buddies who have been kind enough to link to me, but Matt over at Holy Chao has not only dropped by and commented (thanks, Matt!) but added this spot to his “Friendly Links”, along with the likes of Gentle Reader Dan P, David Moles, where I lurk and occasionally interrupt, and Benjamin Rosenbaum, who has some brilliant kid-stories recently, and a bunch of people I’ve never heard of. I must say that being on a blogroll is a bit of a kick, in exactly the way I didn’t expect it to be.

Anyway, Your Humble Blogger is clearly back from Summer Recess, and so are the Gentle Readers. Shana Tova, all: a good year, a healthy year, and a sweet year for all of us. We could use it.

chazak, chazak, v’nitchazek,
-Vardibidian.

August 5, 2005

Connected, sorta

Well, and YHB is trying to figure out how to use the local library's internet connection to do a trifle of blogging, before you Gentle Readers all forget why this Tohu Bohu is worth visiting. If it is. Anyway, this is being typed on the computer with dial-up, and will be (probably) saved to a floppy disc, which will then be carried into the library and so on and so forth. The thing is that when we finally get set up here in lovely (but rural) Kent CT, we will probably do the goofy wireless-network-through-the-house stuff. We'll get a wifific laptop, and be all whatsit, just like all you Gentle Readers probably have been for years. At the moment, though, it's a floppy in the pocket.

The other thing about being in the Land of Dial-Up is that I don't get my news from the computer, which really means that I don't get much news at all. An occasional radio broadcast and (gasp!) televised news are my only connection to the world. The disturbing thing is how little that disturbs me. I have some books, and I have my family to chat with, and if I don't know anything about the latest international incident, or how the war is going, or even how my Giants are doing, well, it doesn't bother my mind. Of course, I'm keeping busy, what with unpacking all my worldly possessions, or rather opening the boxes in which my worldly possessions are packed and then deciding which to unpack and which to leave in the old barn for a year. Once that is accomplished, I'll probably notice the lack of news simply as a matter of entertainment, to fill my day (particularly once my Best Reader goes back on the job). Is that all the news is to me? I know that I find the news entertaining, but I do have an ill-formed sense that I ought to follow it, that it is incumbent on me as a citizen to Keep Up. And yet ... it's not like I really need to follow the news to be a good citizen; I can vote based on principles, party affiliation and endorsements and come up with the same candidates I get from a more knowledgeable perspective. Yes, I can't participate in the great national conversations without following the news, but do I participate in those anyway?

So, tell me, is it really important for me to follow the news, or is just rationalizing my entertainment preference? It won't make any practical difference, as when I get back on the broadband, I'll be following the news anyway. What I want to know is whether I'll be a better person for it.

chazak, chazak, v’nitchazek,
-Vardibidian.

June 6, 2005

State of the Blog

Your Humble Blogger hasn’t done a State of the Blog for a while, it seems. The state hasn’t really changed very much, though, which I suppose is a good thing. No news is good news, and the like.

I’ve been in the mid-thirties in notes, from 39 in January down to 34 in February, 35 each in March and April, and up to 39 again in May. Comments followed a similar path, unsurprisingly, 106 in January, 105 in February, 90 in March, 82 in April, and up to 109 comments in May. Clearly, writing about Pop Music is a good way to get comments.

On the commentless-note front also it’s been pretty steady: 14 in January, 11 in February, 15 each in March and April, and 13 in May. And for the book reports, there were 8 in January, 7 each in February and March, only 6 in April, and 10 in May. Of course, a lot of that depends on when I get around to writing the reports; two of the reports I’ve written in June were for books I read in May, and I assume I wrote reports in May for books read in June.

I suspect, though, that I’m entering into a period where I will not be posting so much. Maybe yes, maybe no. The actual life is pretty complicated at present, and unlikely to get much simpler in the near future. I may well get to 35 posts in June, but I’d be surprised if I hit 30 in July, what with one thing and another, and frankly, I haven’t the faintest idea where I’ll be or what I’ll be doing in August. So. State of the Blog: uncertain.

chazak, chazak, v’nitchazek,
-Vardibidian.

February 1, 2005

State of the Blog

It’s the end of another month. In January 2004, Your Humble Blogger managed 39 posts; y’all Gentle Readers obliged me with 106 comments, leaving only 14 commentless posts. These numbers should be compared to December 2004 with 32 posts, 121 and 10 commentless posts. Not bad, particularly as I was away for the first week of it. The number of posts appears to be settling into the thirties, which is probably more or less right. Forties would be all right, I suppose, but fifty posts a month would be too much, I think. It looks like I read eight books in January, and somehow none of them were re-reads. Not a bad month, although I need to be more conscientious about the parshot. I still owe everybody a note on last week’s Yithro, and it’s already Tuesday night and I haven’t read next week’s portion. The highlight is my first guest post, which I hope will begin a trend.

I suppose, as this Tohu Bohu gets to the end of its second year, it is about time I figure out why I’m doing it. It turns out that I’m doing it for the comments.

One of the odd things about the set-up here is that I don’t see the statistics for the site. That is, I’m sure Jed at some point told me how to get them, or volunteered to send me information about them, but in fact, I’ve never done it, and have no idea at all whether there are ten regular readers of this Tohu Bohu or ten million. Well, I suspect the former is closer. But I don’t know. As a result, I have managed to keep from becoming obsessed with how widely-read this Tohu Bohu is, or how I could claw my way up the blogosphere’s ladder of whuffie. My knowledge of my Gentle Readers is confined, pretty much, to the commenters, with a couple of exceptions. That turns out to be lovely; when I write, my audience is clear in my mind, and it isn’t statistical numbers but commenters with names.

Now, as it happens, Your Humble Blogger has himself essentially stopped leaving comments on other people’s blogs. At least, on blogs kept by people I don’t know. I’ve actually cut back quite a bit on my blog reading altogether, for a variety of reasons. I still read half-a-dozen blogs—oh, why be coy, I read the Language Log, Rhetorica, Whatever, Nathan Newman, the Decembrist, and the CJR Daily, as well as Altercation (which I no longer particularly enjoy, but read anyway) and Eschaton (ditto) and on occasion Pandagon. I have also started reading Michael Bérubé’s blog, but I doubt I’ll keep it up. And there’s Fafblog, of course, which remains the world’s only source for Fafblog, but is better if I don’t read every entry.

Where was I before I started blogrolling? Oh, yes, I’m down to reading about ten blogs (not counting, by the way, journals and blogs written by friends or friends of friends; rest assured that I read and enjoy your blog, Gentle Reader, unless you’ve locked me out of it, you bastard), and I’ve pretty nearly stopped leaving comments on any of them. Not that I was ever a prolific commenter, but I would probably leave one or two posts a week, around the ’sphere. I’ve never had particularly good experiences doing so. Oh, I’ve had responses, and now and then interesting and challenging responses (particularly from Mssrs Scalzi and Cline), but I’ve never felt that I was either participating in the blog or building a relationship with a person. And in the absence of any particularly good experiences, the few bad experiences I’ve had have led me off the whole commenting business.

At the same time that I’ve gone off the commenting business elsewhere, I have come to enjoy the comments here as the best part of blogging. I assume that this is because (a) the comments here are ever so much better than those elsewhere, and (2) all the comments are in response to Your Humble Blogger, a subject of great interest to Your Humble Blogger. Still and all, what I want is to make my Gentle Readers happier about commenting here. Not that I necessarily want more comments out of you lazy malingerers, just to make commenting here that good experience that I haven’t had elsewhere. I have no idea how to do that.

The big difference, of course, is that most of my Gentle Readers are old buddies of YHB. I do still leave the odd comment or two on the personal journals/blogs of people I know (my aggregator has 21 such, 16 of which are on LiveJournal, and about half-a-dozen of which are essentially dormant). Now, most of these are ham-and-eggs journals, which is all right, because I actually care about what my old buddies have for breakfast. That’s not to say that these ham-and-eggs journals never talk about philosophy or books or politics or Scripture or economic theory, but for the most part they are talking about their lives, day to day. The comment conversations, then, mostly talk about those lives, which is nice enough and accomplishes the good experience I’m looking for there, but not what I’m looking for here.

So my question to you, Gentle Readers, is what can I do for you? This breaks into a couple of things, some of them technical. Would a different format be better? The threaded comments over at lj seem cool, but I’m reluctant to take this Tohu Bohu over there due to the ham-and-eggs connotations. Would any others like to be guest bloggers on occasion? I’d be happy to post notes from those of you that don’t maintain blogs of your own, or of course from those who do but want response from the group here. Am I failing to respond to too many comments, or am I hogging the last word? Am I making it clear that I actually think about each comment, even if I don’t respond to it? And I know y’all are busy, and I can’t do anything about that, nor about the internet thing that seems to require thought before posting if you don’t want to say things you don’t want to say.

Then there’s the RSS issue. Jed tells me he could set me up with one the same as his, but I’m reluctant. I find in my own experience that if I get the note in the aggregator, I don’t bother to go to the blog to see if there are any comments (as the comments don’t show up in the aggregator). And, of course, having read the note in your aggregators, I don’t know if you will hit my home page a few days later to see that the conversation is still going on. I think aggregators are terrific for things you want to read but not comment on, but I want you to comment. On the other hand, if you don’t read the thing, you can’t comment on it, so if having a feed means you would read more of the notes, then that would be good, too.

There are other things I could use advice on, but in general, I’d like to ask people who comment what their preferences are, and people who don’t to either make an exception or email me to tell me if there is anything I can do to make this Tohu Bohu a good commenting joint. Unless I’ve already had a nice long conversation with you about it, in which case you are Off the Hook. Everyone else, have at me.

Thank you,
-Vardibidian.

January 14, 2005

State of the Blog

It occurs to me that I’d enjoy doing a State of the Blog for December, although with only 32 entries I have to give myself a pretty substantial break for being out of town. Still, my Gentle Readers contributed a total of 121 comments and only left ten of my entries commentless. So y’all have picked up my slack.

12 of my 32 entries were book reports, of which nine were new reads, so that’s all right. Among the others were a couple of the sort of posts I actually want to write, so that’s even better. On the whole, I think December was a pretty good month. In particular, if anybody missed it, I’d like to draw attention to my post on Purity and the conversation following it. That’s the sort of thing that makes the blog worthwhile: I note something somewhere, write something about it that I still like, although a wide-ranging conversation brings my attention to a variety of aspects in a variety of ways, without anybody getting cranky (as far as I could tell). Now, if I could do that once a week, I’d be getting somewhere.

That also brings to my mind something I’ve been thinking about in relation to the Koufax awards over at Wampum. My first reaction, well, my first reaction was to curse the lefty and his hated team. My second reaction was probably amusement that the award for bloggers of the left was named after someone who was only dominant for a few years, was average before, and was out of the business just after. It’s not a bad award for Blogovia, where it’s all about Peak Value. Anyway, my third reaction was that surely in a list of 160 nominees for “Most Deserving of Wider Recognition there’s room for YHB’s little Tohu Bohu. I mean, don’t I deserve wider recognition? Ain’t I a blogger and a lefty?

The thing is, though, that although I do dearly desire wider recognition in the sense that I want the ungrudging respect of admirable men and women, I don’t actually want much in the way of greater readership. Or, more accurately, I don’t want comments from hundreds of ignorant yahoos, or even hundreds of informed yahoos. I’m pretty complacent about the commenters, and given my druthers, I druther that Michael and david and metasilk and David and Nao and Chris and fran and Dan and Jed and Chaos and Irilyth and Amy and Wayman and all had a lot more free time to comment, rather than having an addition two dozen commenters. And I mean that only partially in the elitist my-friends-are-the-smartest-and-most-articulate-people-on-the-web sense, although it’s hard to imagine the tone being raised by another two dozen commenters. Mostly, I mean it in the sense that I actually know y’all, even though at least two of you I’ve never met; when I read a comment, I have a context to put it in, either through years of face to face conversations or through the occasional comments here and through your own blogs.

Now, if anybody else wants to start commenting, I’d be happy as a pig in mud. If CRConrad chimes in from Finland, or alleged-Neal-Asher, or Sozadee, or quadratic, or anybody starts commenting frequently, I feel confident my mental ability can expand to include them. Gentle Reader, please don’t think I don’t want you to comment; I do. It’s that other guy that I'd rather not have. Really, it isn’t even him, but the aggregate of dozens of them that I see on Pandagon and Alas, a Blog, not to mention Eschaton. Which is to say, I want the wider recognition I so richly deserve, I just don’t want to be bothered by that recognition or have it affect my life in any negative way at all.

Where was I? Oh, yes, the blog. Still without form, still void. Still how I like it. And still behind on vacation reading: I have four reports to write before I can pick up another book in good conscience. The rule, you see, is that the stack of completed but unreported books should not grow large enough that when it topples, I am at risk of injury.

Thank you,
-Vardibidian.

December 1, 2004

State of the blog

November, oddly enough, seems like it wasn’t a bad month for this Tohu Bohu of ours. I wrote 45 entries, which is quite a few more than previous months (Oct-34, Sept-37, Aug-22). Of those, only nine were Book Reports, so the increase isn’t entirely due to my having stocked up on comfort books. Six of the nine were re-reads, but then three new books in a month isn’t so terrible, either.

Of course, eight of the entries were related to my Parshah project; there were only 28 entries unrelated to either project. And three of those were simply passing along poems for occasions. Plus a few (for me) unusually short entries, simply pointing to other things. So if I want to be depressed about not being a productive blogger, there’s hope.

Actually, I have been particularly depressed (note: stop reading now, as what follows is self-pitiful whinging) about the way this Tohu Bohu exposes one of my most intractable character flaws. I have, in a year and a half or so, started a variety of projects: an examination of 21 Conservative Tenets, of which Your Humble Blogger examined 17; a discussion of The Tipping Point, which I abandoned before discussing the last chapter or writing any conclusory note; my attempt to analyze the convention speeches, which petered out before actually analyzing the two main speeches of the first convention; my abortive attempt at a Book Club, which got up to the fourth chapter out of twelve; and an Oscars game which as of yesterday had no entries. Today, though, there has been an initial entry to the Oscars game, which may not have to be abandoned after all, and I’m able to remind myself that I have written over a hundred Book Reports and am only thirty-one days away from successfully completing that year’s project. I’ve also (I think) well begun on my Parshah project, which although it hasn’t generated the kind of discussion on the blog I had wanted has been immensely valuable to Your Humble Blogger. And, after all, it’s not as if I didn’t already know that I have very little discipline. OK, end whinging and go back to boasting.

I am particularly pleased to have ninety comments (that is, 90 made during the month of November; there may well be more comments made on November entries). That’s pretty good; October only had 69, five or six of which rightly belonged to September (particularly chatty with 92 comments of its own). On the other hand, 22 of my November notes totally failed to elicit comments, from 15 in October and 12 in September, so I’m writing more but less provocatively. Or, of course, my Gentle Readers have limits.

Anyway, November 2003 I wrote sixteen entries and had 41 comments, so things are looking up. And I seem to do better in the Spring than the Fall, so there’s the chance that by May I’ll be writing sixty entries and have a hundred and fifty comments (that, Gentle Readers, is a joke).

None of this naval gazing gets me any closer to the essential question of why am I doing this and its concomitant am I doing it well, but the important thing is that I have learned how to spell concomitant, which has fewer t’s and m’s than I expected.

Thank you,
-Vardibidian.

March 28, 2004

Blogroll, of sorts

Your Humble Blogger doesn’t have a blogroll, nor need one, I think. But the news that The Invisible Adjunct is hanging up the old keyboard reminds me that I’ve been meaning to note down a few blogs I read and enjoy.

The problem is, after spending a day and a half between that last sentence and this one, I really only have a very few, and most of those I have, I have already mentioned in this Tohu Bohu more than once.

I look at the Daily Kos every day. I look at the main column, read the intros, and then scan the diaries to the right (at least, that’s how it’s set up on my screen). I maybe read three actual entries a day. Kos himself writes with the snarky tone that I associate with blogs generally; DHinMI is even more snarky, but tends to get a bit deeper into topics, tho’ still without much value added except his style. The analysis is dreadful, but they do draw my attention to stories I would otherwise not get until the next day. In addition, the group there acts as a sort of focus group, picking which outrages to get het up over, and which to sneer at, and which to more or less let go. It’s an interesting attempt to form an actual on-line community; I hope somebody’s studying it for a dissertation.

I’ve mentioned Nathan Newman in this Tohu Bohu a few times; his blog is outstanding. He focuses mostly on labour issues, but his reactions to current political events are historically informed, well-written, and not altogether predictable. He appears to understand the way politics works, and is a pragmatist. He and I share a good many assumptions (though we come to different conclusions on specifics fairly often). Also, he writes clearly, which is a plus. It’s really a terrific blog, but he hasn’t built up a decent community in the comments section. Which is too bad, really.

Rhetorica is my favorite blog in the blogger-I’ve-never-met category. Andrew Cline is interested in the use of rhetoric, the reporting of rhetoric, journalism, the presidency, the public interest, and the public. It’s an endlessly fascinating subject (ok, it’s endlessly fascinating to YHB) about which he writes with both insight and wit. Half his entries I wish I could have written myself, and half are things I never would have thought of, and require a good deal of thinking before I can agree or disagree with them. Again here, he would benefit from a dozen or so regular correspondents, but that’s scarcely his fault. He responds to comments quickly and gently, but seems to have few long-term readers with whom to have an ongoing dialogue. My own comments there are generally fawning in nature, which doesn’t really help.

The Blogging of the President is an attempt, I think, to form a community of well-read, well-spoken people to discuss the campaign in great depth. In my arrogant opinion, it hasn’t succeeded yet, and I doubt it will, but it’s an interesting attempt. The bit that is most active is the BOPNews blog with regular posts from a half-dozen or so people who are, for the most part, intelligent, well-informed, and interesting, if pretentious and annoying (about which YHB can hardly complain about). Also, it’s pretty clearly dissolved from a blog about, well, about the Blogging of the President to a pretty random blog without a brief. I still check it, and on rare occasion post to it.

Clutch Hits, over at the Baseball Primer, has been my favorite baseball blog/chat site for a couple of years, but I’ve drifted away during this off-season. In a month or two, they are going to a registration-based system, which might help entice me back, but what will really get me back is the opening of the season, and (I hope) more discussion about the teams and the players.

While I’m on the baseball topic, I check the fairly new Phillies Foul Balls pretty frequently; the writer is an old college buddy, a good writer, and a good baseball guy. It’s a specific Phillies site, though, so prepare to be depressed (haw, haw). Good, decent, Giants fans can check Westwood Blues and Waiting for Boof, both of which are entertaining, if you know what they’re talking about.

On a more personal note, I of course read my gracious host, and enjoy it tremendously, and I would certainly read my servermate, PoI, if Dan would post now and then.

Other old college buddies have Livejournals; for now I approximate the friends list by using irilyth’s list, which in addition to irilyth himself, has gannet, whose magnificent journal I’ve mentioned in the past, along with several others, whose journals are mostly of interest to those who know and care about them. I sometimes refer to these as ham-and-eggs journals, as the journalist may well post more or less the information we might have conversed about if we lived on the same block, such as what he or she had for breakfast. I’m terribly glad that some of my friends have ’em, as I’m such a terrible correspondent.

There are others I look at now and then. I’ve just started reading John Scalzi’s Whatever, which appears to be entertaining. Alas, a Blog is enjoyable. Jeanne, at Body and Soul,lets her character come through very well, in a political blog. For some reason, I do read Margaret Cho’s blog despite finding it more annoying than amusing. I’ve just noted Easily Distracted, which I’m hoping becomes worth reading regularly.

That’s pretty much it. And I’m not, on the whole, looking for more. Suggestions would of course be appreciated, but I may not manage to follow them up. I know there are brilliant, entertaining, compelling, challenging blogs out there which would knock my proverbial socks off, but there are brilliant, entertaining, compelling, challenging books, too, and my brilliant, entertaining, compelling, challenging Best Reader to spend a life with, and my brilliant, entertaining, compelling, challenging Non-Reader to be raised, and brilliant, entertaining, compelling, challenging meals to be eaten as well, and brilliant, entertaining, compelling, challenging naps to be, er, well.

Redintegro Iraq,
-Vardibidian.